For Publishers
DiscoveryMetadataPeer reviewHostingPublishing
For Researchers
JoinPublishReviewCollect
Register
Blog
About
Search
Advanced search
My ScienceOpen
Search
For Publishers
For Researchers
Blog
About
8
views
137
references
 Top references
cited by
2
    
0 reviews
 Review
0
comments
 Comment
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      117
      similar
       All similar
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Menstrual cycle hormones and oral contraceptives: a multimethod systems physiology-based review of their impact on key aspects of female physiology

      review-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Abstract

          Hormonal changes around ovulation divide the menstrual cycle (MC) into the follicular and luteal phases. In addition, oral contraceptives (OCs) have active (higher hormone) and placebo phases. Although there are some MC-based effects on various physiological outcomes, we found these differences relatively subtle and difficult to attribute to specific hormones, as estrogen and progesterone fluctuate rather than operating in a complete on/off pattern as observed in cellular or preclinical models often used to substantiate human data. A broad review reveals that the differences between the follicular and luteal phases and between OC active and placebo phases are not associated with marked differences in exercise performance and appear unlikely to influence muscular hypertrophy in response to resistance exercise training. A systematic review and meta-analysis of substrate oxidation between MC phases revealed no difference between phases in the relative carbohydrate and fat oxidation at rest and during acute aerobic exercise. Vascular differences between MC phases are also relatively small or nonexistent. Although OCs can vary in composition and androgenicity, we acknowledge that much more work remains to be done in this area; however, based on what little evidence is currently available, we do not find compelling support for the notion that OC use significantly influences exercise performance, substrate oxidation, or hypertrophy. It is important to note that the study of females requires better methodological control in many areas. Previous studies lacking such rigor have contributed to premature or incorrect conclusions regarding the effects of the MC and systemic hormones on outcomes. While we acknowledge that the evidence in certain research areas is limited, the consensus view is that the impact of the MC and OC use on various aspects of physiology is small or nonexistent.

          Related collections

          Most cited references137

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          The feasibility of creating a checklist for the assessment of the methodological quality both of randomised and non-randomised studies of health care interventions.

          S H Downs, N. Black (1998)
          To test the feasibility of creating a valid and reliable checklist with the following features: appropriate for assessing both randomised and non-randomised studies; provision of both an overall score for study quality and a profile of scores not only for the quality of reporting, internal validity (bias and confounding) and power, but also for external validity. A pilot version was first developed, based on epidemiological principles, reviews, and existing checklists for randomised studies. Face and content validity were assessed by three experienced reviewers and reliability was determined using two raters assessing 10 randomised and 10 non-randomised studies. Using different raters, the checklist was revised and tested for internal consistency (Kuder-Richardson 20), test-retest and inter-rater reliability (Spearman correlation coefficient and sign rank test; kappa statistics), criterion validity, and respondent burden. The performance of the checklist improved considerably after revision of a pilot version. The Quality Index had high internal consistency (KR-20: 0.89) as did the subscales apart from external validity (KR-20: 0.54). Test-retest (r 0.88) and inter-rater (r 0.75) reliability of the Quality Index were good. Reliability of the subscales varied from good (bias) to poor (external validity). The Quality Index correlated highly with an existing, established instrument for assessing randomised studies (r 0.90). There was little difference between its performance with non-randomised and with randomised studies. Raters took about 20 minutes to assess each paper (range 10 to 45 minutes). This study has shown that it is feasible to develop a checklist that can be used to assess the methodological quality not only of randomised controlled trials but also non-randomised studies. It has also shown that it is possible to produce a checklist that provides a profile of the paper, alerting reviewers to its particular methodological strengths and weaknesses. Further work is required to improve the checklist and the training of raters in the assessment of external validity.
          Article 0 comments Cited 496 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Defining Training and Performance Caliber: A Participant Classification Framework

            Alannah K.A. McKay, Trent Stellingwerff, Ella S. Smith … (2021)
            Throughout the sport-science and sports-medicine literature, the term “elite” subjects might be one of the most overused and ill-defined terms. Currently, there is no common perspective or terminology to characterize the caliber and training status of an individual or cohort. This paper presents a 6-tiered Participant Classification Framework whereby all individuals across a spectrum of exercise backgrounds and athletic abilities can be classified. The Participant Classification Framework uses training volume and performance metrics to classify a participant to one of the following: Tier 0: Sedentary; Tier 1: Recreationally Active; Tier 2: Trained/Developmental; Tier 3: Highly Trained/National Level; Tier 4: Elite/International Level; or Tier 5: World Class. We suggest the Participant Classification Framework can be used to classify participants both prospectively (as part of study participant recruitment) and retrospectively (during systematic reviews and/or meta-analyses). Discussion around how the Participant Classification Framework can be tailored toward different sports, athletes, and/or events has occurred, and sport-specific examples provided. Additional nuances such as depth of sport participation, nationality differences, and gender parity within a sport are all discussed. Finally, chronological age with reference to the junior and masters athlete, as well as the Paralympic athlete, and their inclusion within the Participant Classification Framework has also been considered. It is our intention that this framework be widely implemented to systematically classify participants in research featuring exercise, sport, performance, health, and/or fitness outcomes going forward, providing the much-needed uniformity to classification practices.
            Article 0 comments Cited 309 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              The Effects of Menstrual Cycle Phase on Exercise Performance in Eumenorrheic Women: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

              Kelly McNulty, Kirsty Elliott-Sale, Eimear Dolan … (2020)
              Background Concentrations of endogenous sex hormones fluctuate across the menstrual cycle (MC), which could have implications for exercise performance in women. At present, data are conflicting, with no consensus on whether exercise performance is affected by MC phase. Objective To determine the effects of the MC on exercise performance and provide evidence-based, practical, performance recommendations to eumenorrheic women. Methods This review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Four databases were searched for published experimental studies that investigated the effects of the MC on exercise performance, which included at least one outcome measure taken in two or more defined MC phases. All data were meta-analysed using multilevel models grounded in Bayesian principles. The initial meta-analysis pooled pairwise effect sizes comparing exercise performance during the early follicular phase with all other phases (late follicular, ovulation, early luteal, mid-luteal and late luteal) amalgamated. A more comprehensive analysis was then conducted, comparing exercise performance between all phases with direct and indirect pairwise effect sizes through a network meta-analysis. Results from the network meta-analysis were summarised by calculating the Surface Under the Cumulative Ranking curve (SUCRA). Study quality was assessed using a modified Downs and Black checklist and a strategy based on the recommendations of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment Development and Evaluation (GRADE) working group. Results Of the 78 included studies, data from 51 studies were eligible for inclusion in the initial pairwise meta-analysis. The three-level hierarchical model indicated a trivial effect for both endurance- and strength-based outcomes, with reduced exercise performance observed in the early follicular phase of the MC, based on the median pooled effect size (ES0.5 = − 0.06 [95% credible interval (CrI): − 0.16 to 0.04]). Seventy-three studies had enough data to be included in the network meta-analysis. The largest effect was identified between the early follicular and the late follicular phases of the MC (ES0.5 = − 0.14 [95% CrI: − 0.26 to − 0.03]). The lowest SUCRA value, which represents the likelihood that exercise performance is poor, or among the poorest, relative to other MC phases, was obtained for the early follicular phase (30%), with values for all other phases ranging between 53 and 55%. The quality of evidence for this review was classified as “low” (42%). Conclusion The results from this systematic review and meta-analysis indicate that exercise performance might be trivially reduced during the early follicular phase of the MC, compared to all other phases. Due to the trivial effect size, the large between-study variation and the number of poor-quality studies included in this review, general guidelines on exercise performance across the MC cannot be formed; rather, it is recommended that a personalised approach should be taken based on each individual's response to exercise performance across the MC. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1007/s40279-020-01319-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
              Article 0 comments Cited 146 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
                Bookmark
                All references

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Journal ID (nlm-ta): J Appl Physiol (1985)
                Journal ID (iso-abbrev): J Appl Physiol (1985)
                Journal ID (publisher-id): J Appl Physiol (1985)
                Journal ID (publisher-id): JAPPL
                Title: Journal of Applied Physiology
                Publisher: American Physiological Society (Rockville, MD )
                ISSN (Print): 8750-7587
                ISSN (Electronic): 1522-1601
                Publication date (Print): 1 December 2023
                Publication date (Electronic): 12 October 2023
                Publication date PMC-release: 12 October 2023
                Volume: 135
                Issue: 6
                Pages: 1284-1299
                Affiliations
                [1] 1Department of Kinesiology, McMaster University ( https://ror.org/02fa3aq29) , Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
                [2] 2Mary MacKillop Institute for Health Research, Australian Catholic University , Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
                [3] 3Institute of Sport, Manchester Metropolitan University , Manchester, United Kingdom
                [4] 4Department of Pediatrics, McMaster University Medical Center , Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
                Author notes
                [*]

                A. C. D’Souza and M. Wageh contributed equally to this work.

                Correspondence: S. M. Phillips ( phillis@ 123456mcmaster.ca ); A. C. D’Souza ( dsouza14@ 123456mcmaster.ca ); M. Wageh ( wagehm@ 123456mcmaster.ca ).
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9619-2454
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9501-7662
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9851-3610
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1956-4098
                Article
                Publisher ID: JAPPL-00346-2023 Publisher-manuscript ID: JAPPL-00346-2023
                DOI: 10.1152/japplphysiol.00346.2023
                PMC ID: 10979803
                PubMed ID: 37823207
                SO-VID: b65d3edd-6624-4aaa-854b-dff41b1cc3b9
                Copyright © Copyright © 2023 The Authors.
                License:

                Licensed under Creative Commons Attribution CC-BY 4.0. Published by the American Physiological Society.

                History
                Date received : 1 June 2023
                Date revision received : 18 September 2023
                Date accepted : 10 October 2023
                Funding
                Funded by: Ontario Women's Health Scholar
                Award ID: N/A
                Award Recipient : Jennifer S. Williams
                Funded by: Canada Research Chairs (Chaires de recherche du Canada), doi 10.13039/501100001804;
                Award ID: N/A
                Award Recipient : Stuart M. Phillips
                Funded by: Gouvernement du Canada | Canadian Institutes of Health Research (IRSC), doi 10.13039/501100000024;
                Award ID: N/A
                Award Recipient : Mark A. Tarnopolsky
                Funded by: Gouvernement du Canada | Canadian Institutes of Health Research (IRSC), doi 10.13039/501100000024;
                Award ID: N/A
                Award Recipient : Stuart M. Phillips
                Funded by: Gouvernement du Canada | Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC), doi 10.13039/501100000038;
                Award ID: N/A
                Award Recipient : Maureen J. MacDonald
                Funded by: Gouvernement du Canada | Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC), doi 10.13039/501100000038;
                Award ID: N/A
                Award Recipient : Gianni Parise
                Funded by: Gouvernement du Canada | Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC), doi 10.13039/501100000038;
                Award ID: N/A
                Award Recipient : Mark A. Tarnopolsky
                Funded by: Gouvernement du Canada | Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC), doi 10.13039/501100000038;
                Award ID: N/A
                Award Recipient : Stuart M. Phillips
                Categories
                Subject: Review
                Series title: Sex Differences in the Response to Exercise Training
                Custom metadata
                Call for Papers True

                Keywords: endocrinology,exercise,female,human,menstrual cycle
                Data availability:
                Keywords: endocrinology, exercise, female, human, menstrual cycle

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_

                Similar content117

                See all similar

                Cited by2

                See all cited by

                Most referenced authors1,247

                See all reference authors