Trial reportObesity (Silver Spring, Md.)2018
Effects of Indoor Thermal Environment on Human Food Intake, Productivity, and Comfort: Pilot, Randomized, Crossover Trial.
Trial report in Obesity (Silver Spring, Md.), 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Combined torso and foot heat exposure reduces acuteTemperature (Austin, Tex.) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveIt was hypothesized that exposure to mild temperatures above the human thermoneutral zone would decrease caloric intake in a sedentary office environment.
methodsWomen (n = 25) were randomized in a crossover design to perform seated office work for 7 hours in a thermoneutral condition (control, 19°C-20°C) and a condition above the thermoneutral zone (warm, 26°C-27°C). Food intake was estimated by weight and bomb calorimetry, peripheral temperature by thermal imaging, and thermal comfort and productivity by questionnaires. Mixed effects models were used to examine the effects of thermal condition on caloric intake.
resultsParticipants ate, on average, 357 kcal less in the warm condition, adjusting for BMI and peripheral temperature (P = 0.0219). According to the survey results at midday (after 3.5 hours of exposure), 96% of the participants in the warm condition reported being comfortable (n = 24) compared with 32% in the control condition (n = 8). More participants reported being as productive or more productive than usual in the warm condition (n = 22, 88%) than in the control condition (n = 12, 48%).
conclusionsThis line of research is worthy of further exploration. Untightening climate control toward warmer conditions during summer to increase comfort and productivity while decreasing caloric intake may prove both effective and comfortable.
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.