MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391909215 · doi:10.1113/jp285977

Hormonal intrauterine devices and heat exchange during exercise

2024· article· en· W4391909215 on OpenAlexafffund
Nathalie V. Kirby, Robert D. Meade, Brodie J. Richards, Sean R. Notley, Glen P. Kenny

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Physiology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicThermoregulation and physiological responses
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsFollicular phaseLuteal phaseMenstrual cycleIntensity (physics)ThermoregulationAnimal scienceInternal medicineMedicineChemistryEndocrinologyHormoneBiologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Synthetic progestins in oral contraceptives are thought to blunt heat dissipation by reducing skin blood flow and sweating. However, whether progestin‐releasing intrauterine devices (IUDs) modulate heat loss during exercise‐heat stress is unknown. We used direct calorimetry to measure whole‐body total (dry + evaporative) heat loss in young, physically active women (mean (SD); aged 24 (4) years, 39.3 (5.3) ml/kg/min) with (IUD; n = 19) and without (Control; n = 17) IUDs in the follicular and luteal phases of the menstrual cycle during light‐ and moderate‐intensity exercise at fixed rates of heat production (∼175 and ∼275 W/m2) in 30°C, ∼21% relative humidity. Between‐group and ‐phase differences were evaluated using traditional hypothesis testing and statistical equivalence testing within pre‐determined bounds (±11 W/m2; difference required to elicit a ±0.3°C difference in core temperature over 1 h) in each exercise bout. Whole‐body total heat loss was statistically equivalent between groups within ±11 W m−2 (IUD–Control [90% CIs]; Light: −2 [−8, 5] W/m2, P = 0.007; Moderate: 0 [−6, 6] W/m2, P = 0.002), as were dry and evaporative heat loss (P ≤ 0.023), except for evaporative heat loss during moderate‐intensity exercise (equivalence: P = 0.063, difference: P = 0.647). Whole‐body total and evaporative heat loss were not different between phases (P ≥ 0.267), but dry heat loss was 3 [95% CIs: 1, 5] W/m2 greater in the luteal phase (P ≤ 0.022). Despite this, all whole‐body heat loss outcomes were equivalent between phases (P ≤ 0.003). These findings expand our understanding of the factors that modulate heat exchange in women and provide valuable mechanistic insight of the role of endogenous and exogenous female sex hormones in thermoregulation. image Key points Progestin released by hormonal intrauterine devices (IUDs) may negatively impact heat dissipation during exercise by blunting skin blood flow and sweating. However, the influence of IUDs on thermoregulation has not previously been assessed. We used direct calorimetry to show that IUD users and non‐users display statistically equivalent whole‐body dry and evaporative heat loss, body heat storage and oesophageal temperature during moderate‐ and high‐intensity exercise in a warm, dry environment, indicating that IUDs do not appear to compromise exercise thermoregulation. However, within IUD users and non‐users, dry heat loss was increased and body heat storage and oesophageal temperature were reduced in the luteal compared to the follicular phase of the menstrual cycle, though these effects were small and unlikely to be practically meaningful. Together, these findings expand our understanding of the factors that modulate heat exchange in women and have important practical implications for the design of future studies of exercise thermoregulation.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.272 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of PhysiologySame topicThermoregulation and physiological responsesFrench-language works237,207