ArticlePloS one2026
Examining the anticipated uptake and acceptability of heat therapy in males: Expectations and perceptions before and after hot water immersion.
Article in PloS one, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPassive heat therapy (HT), such as hot water immersion (HWI), has emerged as a non-exercise health-promoting intervention. Epidemiological data demonstrate that HT engagement reduces cardiovascular disease risk, however, experimental protocols are often time intensive and perceived as uncomfortable. This study explored the expectations, perceptions and anticipated uptake of HT in response to an acute HWI session.
methodsTwenty young, healthy, recreationally active males completed a 60-min HWI protocol (39°C) separated by bespoke pre- and post-immersion surveys.
resultsBefore immersion, most participants agreed HWI would be easy to complete (90%) and relaxing (85%). Despite reported thermal discomfort during immersion, post-immersion, most participants perceived HWI as enjoyable (60%) and relaxing (65%), although 50% also agreed HWI was more challenging and less enjoyable than expected. Participants indicated that if given autonomy during HWI, the average self-selected duration would have been 31 ± 13 min. Assuming access, the anticipated weekly future engagement with HT was 49 ± 31 min, with 15% of participants indicating they would select HT over walking to improve their health. Time availability emerged as the most influential factor, with all participants agreeing this would impact future engagement.
conclusionsAlthough there were positive perceptions of HWI, thermal discomfort and time requirements may limit the uptake of HT as a health-promoting intervention. These findings highlight a discrepancy between the duration of commonly employed HT experimental protocols and what individuals appear realistically willing or able to complete. Future HT research should prioritise acceptability and accessibility by developing time-efficient and thermally tolerable protocols.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.