ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2025
Ventilatory Responses to Progressive Treadmill Speeds in Women: A Comparative Analysis of Nasal, Oral, and Oronasal Breathing Conditions.
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBreathing conditions influence ventilatory efficiency and exercise performance, but little research has examined how different breathing conditions affect cardiorespiratory responses in women. Despite the growing popularity of nasal-only breathing in fitness culture, its physiological benefits remain unclear. The purpose of the current study is to examine the ventilatory responses to nasal, oral, and oronasal breathing during treadmill exercise at speeds of 5 to 11 km/h in 10 healthy females.
methodsParticipants completed sessions under each breathing condition while heart rate (HR), oxygen uptake (VO
resultsBreathing condition had minimal impact at lower speeds (5-7 km/h). However, at higher intensities (10-11 km/h), nasal breathing resulted in lower Rf and VE but elevated VE/VCO
conclusionsWhile nasal breathing may suffice at low intensities, it is inadequate at higher intensities, potentially leading to carbon dioxide accumulation and early fatigue. These findings support the use of oral or oronasal breathing during higher-intensity activity and highlight the need for individualized breathing strategies.
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.