Trial reportJournal of athletic training2016
Physiologic and Perceptual Responses to Cold-Shower Cooling After Exercise-Induced Hyperthermia.
Trial report in Journal of athletic training, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Heatstroke Over the Past Decade: Risk Factors, Long-Term Health Consequences, and Preventive Measures.Journal of general internal medicine · 2026Pooled it
- A Randomized Cross-Over Study Comparing Cooling Methods for Exercise-Induced Hyperthermia in Working Dogs in Training.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2023Article
- A Systematic Review of Post-Work Core Temperature Cooling Rates Conferred by Passive Rest.Biology · 2023Review
- Association between active cooling and lower mortality among patients with heat stroke and heat exhaustion.PloS one · 2021Observational
- Health Risks and Interventions in Exertional Heat Stress.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2019Review
- Application of radio frequency based digital thermometer for real-time monitoring of dairy cattle rectal temperature.Veterinary world · 2017Article
- Heatstroke management during the COVID-19 epidemic: recommendations from the experts in Japan.Acute medicine & surgeryArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
contextExercise conducted in hot, humid environments increases the risk for exertional heat stroke (EHS). The current recommended treatment of EHS is cold-water immersion; however, limitations may require the use of alternative resources such as a cold shower (CS) or dousing with a hose to cool EHS patients.
objectiveTo investigate the cooling effectiveness of a CS after exercise-induced hyperthermia.
designRandomized, crossover controlled study.
settingEnvironmental chamber (temperature = 33.4°C ± 2.1°C; relative humidity = 27.1% ± 1.4%). PATIENTS OR OTHER
participantsSeventeen participants (10 male, 7 female; height = 1.75 ± 0.07 m, body mass = 70.4 ± 8.7 kg, body surface area = 1.85 ± 0.13 m(2), age range = 19-35 years) volunteered. INTERVENTION(S): On 2 occasions, participants completed matched-intensity volitional exercise on an ergometer or treadmill to elevate rectal temperature to ≥39°C or until participant fatigue prevented continuation (reaching at least 38.5°C). They were then either treated with a CS (20.8°C ± 0.80°C) or seated in the chamber (control [CON] condition) for 15 minutes. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Rectal temperature, calculated cooling rate, heart rate, and perceptual measures (thermal sensation and perceived muscle pain).
resultsThe rectal temperature (P = .98), heart rate (P = .85), thermal sensation (P = .69), and muscle pain (P = .31) were not different during exercise for the CS and CON trials (P > .05). Overall, the cooling rate was faster during CS (0.07°C/min ± 0.03°C/min) than during CON (0.04°C/min ± 0.03°C/min; t16 = 2.77, P = .01). Heart-rate changes were greater during CS (45 ± 20 beats per minute) compared with CON (27 ± 10 beats per minute; t16 = 3.32, P = .004). Thermal sensation was reduced to a greater extent with CS than with CON (F3,45 = 41.12, P < .001).
conclusionsAlthough the CS facilitated cooling rates faster than no treatment, clinicians should continue to advocate for accepted cooling modalities and use CS only if no other validated means of cooling are available.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.