Sex differences in the work of breathing during exercise are independent of forced vital capacity in healthy adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract During exercise, females have a higher work of breathing ( Ẇ B ) than males for a given minute ventilation () ≥ 50–60 L min −1 , presumably due to sex differences in airway size. However, on average, males have greater forced vital capacity (FVC) than females, and the confounding effect of FVC on sex differences in Ẇ B is unknown. To determine the effects of FVC and sex on Ẇ B during exercise in healthy adults, 30 healthy adults (15 males, 15 females) completed spirometry and an incremental cycle exercise test to exhaustion. Throughout exercise, Ẇ B was calculated based on oesophageal pressure and open‐circuit spirometry. The Ẇ B – relationship was compared between the sexes across all participants and in seven males and seven females matched for FVC and age. Across all participants, FVC had no effect on the Ẇ B – relationship ( P = 0.323), and females had a higher Ẇ B than males at a of 50 ( P = 0.030), 60 ( P = 0.023), 70 ( P = 0.021) and 80 L min −1 ( P = 0.020). At a of 35 ± 2 L min −1 , FVC was not associated with Ẇ B ( r 2 = 0.042, P = 0.278). Conversely, at a of 70 ± 5 L min −1 , FVC was associated with Ẇ B across all participants ( r 2 = 0.164, P = 0.026), but not within each sex (males: r 2 = 0.077, P = 0.317; females: r 2 = 0.011, P = 0.714). In the males and females matched for FVC and age, females had a higher Ẇ B than males at a of 60 ( P = 0.049), 70 ( P = 0.019), 80 ( P = 0.020) and 90 L min −1 ( P = 0.014). Overall, our findings indicate that sex differences in Ẇ B during exercise are not influenced by male–female differences in FVC.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".