The effect of seasonal heat acclimatization on cool‐seeking behaviour during passive heat stress in young adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Seasonal heat acclimatization is known to enhance autonomic thermoeffector responses, whereas the behavioural response following seasonal heat acclimatization remains unknown. We investigated whether seasonal heat acclimatization would alter autonomic and behavioural thermoregulatory responses. Sixteen healthy participants (eight males and eight females) underwent two trials involving 50 min of lower-leg passive heating (lower-leg submersion in 42°C water) with (Fan trial) and without (No fan trial) the voluntary use of a fan in a moderate thermal environment (27°C, 50% relative humidity) across winter and summer months. In Fan trials, participants were allowed to use a fan to maintain thermal comfort, but this was not allowed in the No fan trials. Cool-seeking behaviour was initiated at a lower change in rectal temperature [mean (SD): 0.21 (0.18)°C vs. 0.11 (0.13)°C, P = 0.0327] and change in mean skin temperature [2.34 (0.56)°C vs. 1.81 (0.32)°C, P < 0.0001], and cooling time was longer [16.46 (5.62) vs. 20.40 (4.87) min, P = 0.0224] in summer compared with winter. However, thermal perception was not modified by season during lower-leg passive heating (all P > 0.0864). Furthermore, rectal temperature was higher in summer (P = 0.0433), whereas mean body temperature and skin temperature were not different (all P > 0.0631) between the two seasons in Fan trials. In conclusion, seasonal heat acclimatization enhanced the cool-seeking behaviour from winter to summer.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".