Does level of breast support differentially affect exertional symptoms and respiratory system responses in large- and small-breasted women during treadmill exercise?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We assessed how different levels of breast support affected exertional symptoms and respiratory responses in small- and large-breasted females during treadmill exercise. Twenty recreationally-active females (mean ± SD age: 22 ± 2 years) were divided into small (SBV: 322±77 mL) and large breast volume (LBV: 580±88 mL; p < 0.001, g = 2.98) groups. Participants completed three 5 min bouts of treadmill exercise at 30%, 60%, and 90% of individual peak power output (PPO)—corresponding to walking, low-intensity running, and high-intensity running—wearing either a high-support or low-support sports bra (randomized). Measurements included cardiorespiratory variables, operating lung volumes, inspiratory muscle electromyographic, respiratory muscle pressures, breast acceleration, and exertional symptoms (breathlessness, chest tightness due to bra). High- versus low-support sports bras reduced mean breast acceleration ( p < 0.001, [Formula: see text]=0.55), but evoked higher ratings of chest tightness ( p = 0.040, [Formula: see text]=0.16) in LBV participants at low- and high-intensity running ( g = 1.09 and g = 0.99, respectively). Although breathlessness was not significantly different by bra or breast volume (all p > 0.05), LBV participants consistently reported breathlessness intensity and unpleasantness ≥ 1 Borg unit (BU) higher than SBV participants during low- and high-intensity running (breathlessness intensity: ∼5 vs. ∼3 BU at 60% PPO; ∼9 vs. ∼7 BU at 90% PPO; breathlessness unpleasantness: ∼4 vs. ∼2 BU at 60% PPO, ∼8 vs. ∼6 BU at 90% PPO). There were no differences in cardiorespiratory variables, inspiratory muscle activity, operating lung volumes between breast volume groups or sports bras (all p > 0.05). We emphasize the importance of addressing subjective discomfort, including chest tightness and breathlessness, when developing effective breast support for weight-bearing exercise, especially for larger-breasted individuals.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".