Effects of Sports Bras and Breast Volume on Pulmonary System and Respiratory Symptom Responses to Exercise in Healthy Females
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: This study assessed the individual and combined effects of sports bras and breast volume on pulmonary system and respiratory symptom responses to exercise in recreationally active females. METHODS: Twenty-three healthy females (18-27 yr; bra sizes 32B-36DDD) were divided into small and large breast volume groups (SBV and LBV, respectively) around median volume (324 mL; mean ± SD SBV: 284 ± 38 mL vs LBV: 560 ± 97 mL; P < 0.001, g = 3.84). Participants completed three 5-min bouts of constant-load cycle exercise at 30%, 60%, and 90% of their peak power output while wearing a high-support sports bra, low-support sports bralette, or their personal (self-selected) sports bra in randomized order. Measurements included ventilation, breathing pattern, respiratory pressures, diaphragm electromyogram (EMGdi), and ratings of perceived exertion (RPE), breathlessness (intensity and unpleasantness), and chest tightness due to bra. RESULTS: Compared with low-support and personal sports bras, the high-support sports bra evoked stronger sensations of restricted breathing and chest tightness ("slight" to "moderate" restriction in n = 7 (30%) vs n = 1 (4%) in low-support and personal bras; P = 0.014). There was, however, no evidence of greater concomitant inspiratory constraints, EMGdi, or inspiratory muscle pressure generation in either bra (all P > 0.05). Notably, LBV compared with SBV, participants reported greater RPE ( P = 0.037, ηp2 = 0.20), breathlessness intensity ( P = 0.039, ηp2 = 0.20), and unpleasantness ( P = 0.041; ηp2 = 0.19), which, in the setting of comparable pulmonary system responses to exercise, was likely driven by stronger perceived chest tightness and/or bra awareness in LBV participants. CONCLUSIONS: Despite evoking mild-to-moderately severe chest tightness due to bra during exercise, correctly fitted sports bras, whether low- or high-support, do not impose a physiological burden to the respiratory system and its response to mild-to-heavy intensity exercise in otherwise healthy females.
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) | 0.002 | 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".