Meta-analysis of heat-induced changes in cardiac function from over 400 laboratory-based heat exposure studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Heat waves are associated with increased fatalities from adverse cardiovascular events attributed to the negative effects of heat on cardiac function. However, scientific understanding of acute cardiac adjustments to heat has come primarily from laboratory experiments employing insulated and encapsulated heating modalities, most commonly water-perfused suits. We evaluated whether findings from those studies reflect cardiac responses during more natural exposures to hot ambient conditions simulated in climate-controlled chambers by synthesizing the findings from over 400 laboratory-based heat exposure studies (6858 participant-exposures) published between 1961-2024. Among all included studies, median (interquartile range) elevations in core temperature and heart rate from baseline to end-exposure were 0.9 (0.5-1.3)°C and 27 (15-40) beats/min. Multilevel mixed-effects meta-analyses revealed exacerbated elevations in heart rate, cardiac output, and rate pressure product (estimate of cardiac workload) and blunted falls in systolic pressure in participants heated via encapsulated modalities. Leveraging the large dataset, we also provide empirical estimates of body temperature and cardiovascular responses to a wide range of conditions experienced during heat waves. With rising global temperatures, ecologically-minded physiological research is needed to improve understanding of the effects of heat stress on cardiac responses and further the development of robust climate health models and evidence-based heat-health guidance.
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 | 0.010 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.009 | 0.025 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".