Skip to main content
PLOS One logoLink to PLOS One
. 2024 Jan 2;19(1):e0296388. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0296388

Inappropriate timing of salt intake increases the risk of heat-related illness: An observational study

Takeyasu Kakamu 1,*, Teruna Ito 2, Shota Endo 1, Tomoo Hidaka 1, Yusuke Masuishi 1, Hideaki Kasuga 1, Tetsuhito Fukushima 1
Editor: Timothy Omara3
PMCID: PMC10760686  PMID: 38165857

Abstract

The importance of salt intake in preventing heat-related illness (HRI) is well established, however, the specific method of ingestion has not been sufficiently studied. This study, therefore, aimed to investigate the optimal timing of salt intake to prevent HRI during hot outdoor work. We recruited 28 healthy male firefighters working at a fire department in Japan. They were provided a questionnaire to complete before and after receiving training in the summer season. We assessed their salt intake as before, during, and after training or none. In addition, they completed a brief self-administered diet history questionnaire to evaluate their daily salt and alcohol intake. HRI was determined through subjective and objective symptoms listed in the questionnaire, and environmental data were obtained from a national database. Subsequently, factors related to HRI were determined using a logistic regression model. The mean age of the participants was 31.0 ± 7.7 years. The study was performed within 250 working days, and we detected 28 HRI symptoms (11.2%). The median alcohol intake was 25.6 g/day when calculated according to the actual work system. Logistic mixed effect model analysis revealed that salt intake before training (OR: 5.893, 95% CI: 1.407–24.675), and salt intake before and during training (OR: 22.889, 95% CI: 4.276–122.516) were positively associated with HRI symptoms. The results indicate that inappropriate timing of salt intake increases the risks of HRI. Thus, a timely intake of salt in adequate amounts may be important in preventing these risks.

Introduction

Heat-related illness (HRI) is a common occupational injury that must be addressed. Heat-related morbidity and mortality are expected to escalate as climate change continues due to global warming, with each additional unit rise in temperature projected to further increase these risks [1]. Most outdoor workers are repeatedly exposed to daily occupational heat stress over extended periods, making them more susceptible to both acute and chronic effects of heat strain [2]. In particular, the International Labour Organization estimated that more than 1 billion workers are exposed to high heat episodes, even though not all of these occur during the summer months [3]. The World Health Organization also asserts that “any decline in a worker’s performance of daily activities due to heat, cold, or extreme weather should be considered a “health effect” of climate conditions” [4, 5].

In Japan, HRI is a common occupational health problem. Therefore, during the 13th Occupational Safety and Health Program, the Japanese Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare stated that “the prevention of occupational heat stress is an important goal to reduce the incidences of exertional heat illness during work” [6]. In addition, the ministry declares annual campaigns with the agenda to “Combat Heatstroke at work” to promote efficient practices against HRI; however, despite this intervention, the number of victims of HRI at work has not declined over the past 10 years [7].

Occupational health management comprises three principal factors, namely: work environment control, work practice management, and health care [8]. To minimize occupational HRI, several measures are encouraged, such as on-site temperature measurement, a cooling space set up for work environment control, continuous work time control, availability of adequate equipment such as sunshade, water, and salt intake for work practice management, adequate sleep, breakfast consumption, and disease control for health care [911]. However, adequate rehydration appears to be challenging in occupational settings, especially when workers are exposed to extreme heat during work and leisure time (including overnight). This has been indicated by the high prevalence of low hydration status at the onset of work in occupations with high heat stress and the accumulative negative effects on work productivity following consecutive heat stress [12, 13].

Japanese firefighters are engaged in a 24-h rotation duty, which involves various risks, and thus, imposes a high psycho-physiological workload on them [14]. To minimize these risks, firefighters are obliged to wear fireproof garments for their safety [15]. However, even though this clothing provides excellent protection from fire hazards, it also leads to excessive heat accumulation during physical exertion owing to its high thermal resistance and poor vapor permeability [16, 17]. Consequently, many studies have suggested that an evaporative resistance in conditions of high heat load during firefighting may substantially increase their susceptibility to HRI [16, 17]. Therefore, preventive measures are required to reduce the risks of HRI among firefighters working in harsh and hot environments.

Salt intake has been reported as an important measure for work practice management; however, some studies have confused it with dietary salt intake, and hence, considered it a part of health care. Nonetheless, it is worth noting that the salt intake in HRI aims to prevent heat cramps, as shown in an earlier study, wherein we reported that salt intake reduces the risk of HRI [10]. Although younger workers tend to perform fewer actions to prevent HRI [18], an oral rehydration solution during exercise may reduce their susceptibility to HRI [19]. Ideally, salt is consumed with water as an isotonic fluid. However, in Japan, as a result of emphasizing only on salt intake and not supplementation of lost salt, there are cases of overdose of salt in daily life and salt intake before work. In addition, adequate intake of electrolytes and water balance is another matter worth studying [20]. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the optimal timing of salt intake to prevent HRI during hot outdoor work.

Materials and methods

Study design and participants

This observational study included firefighters working at a fire department in Fukushima Prefecture, Japan. The fire department is located coast side of Fukushima Prefecture, and the Fukushima Daiichi-Nuclear Power Plant is located within the jurisdiction of this fire station. There are many areas under the jurisdiction of fire departments with high radiation doses, and there are many operations in which protective clothing is worn; thus, implementation of measures against heatstroke in the summer is required. A total of 120 people worked in this fire department, and we recruited firefighters according to the following inclusion criteria: those who worked 24 h daily, those aged ≥ 20 years, and those with no past medical history of hypertension and diabetes mellitus that increase the risk of HRI. In total, 58 firefighters were recruited. The included participants were those who participated in outdoor training in the summer and had no past medical history, among whom 28 men agreed to participate in the study. All participants were considered acclimatized to the heat because the recruited subjects were engaged in sweaty exercise at least three times a week. This study was performed in accordance with the “Ethical Guidelines for Medical and Health Research Involving Human Subjects.” It was approved by the Ethics Committee of Fukushima Medical University (approval number- 2021–110). Written informed consent was obtained from all participants.

Data collection

The study period was from July 1 to August 30, 2021, which was announced as “a period to strengthen the prevention of occupational injury” in Japan. The participants completed a multiple-choice questionnaire before and after outdoor training. Before training, the administered questionnaire consisted of questions on effective sleep, alcohol consumption, and body weight. After training, the administered questionnaire included questions on salt intake with options on before, during, and after training or none, water intake, body weight, and subjective HRI symptoms (multiple-choice). Subjective HRI symptoms included muscle pain in the arms or legs, muscle spasms in the arms or legs, intense thirst, decreased urine output, headache, dizziness, lightheadedness, discomfort, weakness, and loss of consciousness. These symptoms were selected based on past published studies [2123]. Body weight was measured using the Body Composition Analyzer BS-230 (Dretech Co., Ltd., Saitama, Japan). The presence of HRI was determined based on subjective and/or objective symptoms. A weight loss ≥ 1.5% after training was selected as an objective HRI symptom [9]. Water was readily available for the participants to drink freely. We also prepared a commercially available salt tablet (0.108 g salt) at the training site. The participants were allowed to take it at any time. The quantities of water and salt consumed were recorded. Finally, data for a total of 250 working days were obtained.

Participants’ age, height, weight, and medical history data were collected through health checkups. Body mass index (BMI) was calculated from the height and weight of the participants. However, medical records for hypertension and diabetes were not documented for the participants of this study.

To account for alcohol consumption, we provided the participants with a brief self-administered diet history questionnaire (BDHQ) in the beginning of July [24]. After they answered the BDHQ, the dietitians confirmed the contents of the questionnaire and interviewed the missing answers directly. Afterward, we calculated alcohol consumption as pure ethanol intake per day.

Details on weather conditions were collected from the Japan Meteorological Agency [25]. In addition, we collected information on dry temperature, relative humidity, and wet-bulb globe temperature (WBGT) every hour at the site. We also collected the maximum and minimum dry temperature and WBGT on the last day and compared the difference between each index.

Statistical analysis

We used R 4.0.3 [26] for all statistical analyses. Data are presented as mean ± standard deviation (SD) for continuous variables with assumed normal distribution, median (interquartile range [IQR]) for continuous variables without assumed normal distribution, or n (%) for categorical variables.

From the results of the BDHQ, we calculated the daily alcohol intake for 4 days/week because Japanese firefighters are engaged in 24 h shifts and can drink alcohol on 4 days/week [27].

We classified the salt intake pattern into four groups: no intake, before training, before and during training, and during training. A logistic mixed effects model [28, 29] was used to model repeated measurements over determine factors related to HRI. Adequate sleep, alcohol consumption, and salt intake pattern were selected as the fixed effects. Participants ID, area, and daily maximum WBGT (over 28°C) were selected as the random effects. Odds ratios (ORs) and their 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were calculated. We used “lme4” packages for this model.

Results

The characteristics of the study participants are shown in Table 1. The mean age of the participants was 31.0 ± 7.7 years, and their mean BMI was 25.0 ± 3.1 kg/m2. The median working duration was 7 days (4–12 days); the mean training time was 1.64 ± 0.64 h/day; the median salt intake was 12.6 (10.2–14.7) g/day; and the median alcohol intake was 12.8 (2.9–28.9) g/day. Twenty-six participants (92.9%) responded that they consumed alcohol, and after adjusting for the number of current drinkers in the group, the median alcohol intake was 25.6 (6.6–50.7) g/day. Of the 26 drinkers, the median intake for 10 participants was over 40 g/day, which was defined as excess alcohol intake [30]. Notably, there was no significant relationship between daily dietary salt intake and HRI prevalence.

Table 1. Characteristics of the study participants (N = 28).

Items Data
Age, year, mean ± SDa 31.0 ± 7.7
Body mass index, kg/m2, mean ± SDa 25.0 ± 3.1
Number of working days, days, median (IQR)b 7 (4–12)
Training time, h, mean ± SDb 1.64 ± 0.64
Sleep duration, hours, mean ± SDb 6.12 ± 0.99
Water intake, time, median (IQR)b 350 (0–500)
Daily salt intake, g/day, median (IQR)c 12.6 (10.2–14.7)
Alcohol intake, g/day, median (IQR)c 12.8 (2.9–28.9)

SD, standard deviation; IQR, interquartile range.

a: Data were obtained from medical records

b: Data were obtained from questionnaires administered after training

c: Data were obtained from a brief self-administered diet history questionnaire

The environmental data for each training site are listed in Table 2. The median temperature and WGBT were recorded as 26.9°C (24.4–29.5) and 26.3°C (23.8–28.7) at Site 1, 27.2°C (24.7–31.2), and 26.2°C (22.8–30.1) at Site 2, and 27.1°C (24.8–29.3) and 26.4°C (24.0–28.2) at Site 3, respectively. No significant differences were observed among the sites for temperature and WGBT (p = 0.658 and 0.953, respectively).

Table 2. Environmental status of each site.

Site 1 (n = 72) Site 2 (n = 21) Site 3 (n = 24) p-valuea
Maximum temperature (°C) 26.9 (24.4–29.5) 27.2 (24.7–31.2) 27.1 (24.8–29.3) 0.658
Maximum WBGT (°C) 26.3 (23.8–28.7) 26.2 (22.8–30.1) 26.4 (24.0–28.2) 0.953

WBGT, wet-bulb globe temperature.

All data are presented as median (interquartile range).

a p-values were calculated using the Kruskal–Wallis test

The study was performed within 250 working days, and we detected 28 HRI symptoms (11.2%) during the study period. The symptom frequency was calculated as a percentage of the days of symptom occurrence against the total number of days of the study. The most frequent symptom was weight loss ≥ 1.5% (n = 10, 4.0%). Other frequent symptoms included intense thirst (n = 9, 3.6%), dizziness (n = 8, 3.2%), discomfort (n = 7, 2.8%), and headache (n = 5, 2.0%) (Table 3).

Table 3. Proportions of heat-related illness symptoms.

Symptoms Total Site 1 Site 2 Site 3
N (%) n (%) n (%) n (%)
N = 250 n = 132 n = 27 n = 90
Objective
  Weight loss ≥ 1.5% 10 (4.0) 3 (2.3) 0 (0.0) 7 (7.7)
Subjective
  Intense thirst 9 (3.6) 4 (3.0) 0 (0.0) 5 (5.5)
  Dizziness 8 (3.2) 4 (3.0) 1 (3.7) 3 (3.3)
  Discomfort 7 (2.8) 3 (2.3) 0 (0.0) 4 (4.4)
  Headache 5 (2.0) 1 (0.8) 0 (0.0) 4 (3.3)
  Pains in the arms or legs 2 (0.8) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 2 (2.2)
  Decreased urine output 1 (0.4) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 1 (1.1)
  Lightheadedness 1 (0.4) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 1 (1.1)
  Weakness 1 (0.4) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 1 (1.1)
  Loss of consciousness 1 (0.4) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 1 (1.1)
  Muscle spasms in the arms or legs 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0)

Logistic mixed effect model analysis revealed that salt intake before training (OR: 5.893, 95% CI: 1.407–24.675), and salt intake before and during training (OR: 22.889, 95% CI: 4.276–122.516) were positively associated with HRI symptoms (Table 4).

Table 4. Logistic mixed effect model of heat-related illness risk.

Item (Fixed effect) Adjusted OR (95% CI)
Adequate sleep -0.997 (0.288–3.450)
Alcohol drinking 2.133 (0.855–5.320)
Water intake 1.273 (0.429–3.782)
Salt intake (reference: none)
Before training 5.893 (1.407–24.675)
Before and during training 22.889 (4.276–0122.516)
During training 2.562 (0.539–12.185)

OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval; BMI, body mass index; WBGT, wet-bulb globe temperature.

Discussion

In this study, we investigated the risk factors for HRI among firefighters during summer training and the effect of the timing of salt intake on the risks of HRI. We found that salt intake before training positively affects HRI, suggesting that preventive salt intake may lead to HRI. Even though the importance of salt intake in preventing HRI is well known, the specific method of ingestion has not been sufficiently studied [10, 19, 20, 31]. Therefore, to the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to focus on the relationship between the timing of salt intake and HRI.

Firefighters are engaged in a 24 h work schedule, and training for emergency services is one of their important daily tasks [15, 32]. However, this training imposes a heavy load on them, especially in a harsh environment, thereby validating the observation of a high HRI occurrence in this study. Besides, this present study under these conditions also reveals that salt intake may be a potent determinant of HRI risks.

Increased plasma osmolality indicates dehydration, and this may be corrected by sufficient water intake to restore any deficit in the intracellular fluid levels. A previous study demonstrated that after exercise, the ingestion of carbohydrate-electrolyte solutions improved the plasma volume, serum osmolality, and serum Na+ concentration while reducing water loss through urination more efficiently than those following the intake of only water [33]. In addition, another study also reported that serum sodium, chloride, and potassium levels showed no remarkable difference after consuming different types of beverages (diet cola, carbohydrate-electrolyte solution, and water) [34]. Consequently, these studies mentioned above indicate that the electrolyte concentration in the intracellular fluid is strictly controlled by homeostasis and that the electrolyte deficit in the body mainly results from the loss of electrolytes from the extracellular fluid. Nonetheless, the repercussions of excessive salt intake in terms of electrolyte restoration are still under discussion. In particular, the relationship between electrolyte loss due to sweating and the benefits of extracellular electrolyte administration is currently being researched.

Salt intake has been encouraged to prevent HRI [7, 10, 19]. This was validated in a prior study that reported that in the absence of sodium intake during training, the muscle cramp threshold frequency decreased significantly, thus, indicating an increase in the susceptibility to cramps [19]. However, both sodium and water are necessary to replenish deficits in the extracellular fluid to prevent dehydration. Notably, a study on fluid-deprived Zucker rats predisposed to hypertension showed that at a dehydration level of ˃ 3%, the rats initially chose hypotonic sodium chloride (NaCl) solution before consuming the almost isotonic NaCl solution to replenish their lost body fluids. Whereas the other group of animals exposed to hypertonic NaCl solution at the same time justified the absence of salt intake induction by a significant increase in water consumption, most probably to maintain constant body fluid balance [31]. Conversely, excess dietary sodium may actually decrease plasma volume, even with a controlled fluid intake [20]. When excessive salt is ingested, the intracellular fluid moves to the extracellular fluid compartment to lower the salt concentration in the blood, thereby inducing urination to mediate the salt excretion [35]. Furthermore, increased urine sodium levels and urine volume as a result of high dietary sodium intake may also cause decreased plasma renin and aldosterone [36]. Overall, high dietary sodium only increases urine volume and is not recommended for preventing HRI. Therefore, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health declared that supplemental dietary sodium must be used judiciously to prevent further dehydration and electrolyte depletion in workers [20].

Generally, alcohol intake is strongly associated with HRI [20]. Ethanol inhibits anti-diuretic hormones, and increased alcohol consumption has been shown to increase gastrointestinal permeability, thus, enhancing the risks of dehydration [20, 37]. Moreover, alcohol also induces reactive hypoglycemia by exacerbating insulin secretion in the presence of a high carbohydrate meal [38]. Therefore, measures to create awareness of the risks associated with alcohol consumption and provide guidance to limit drinking on the day before work are necessary. Our results did not find a significant relationship between alcohol intake and HRI. The estimated daily alcohol intake among the study subjects was 25.6 g/day, with 10 subjects estimated to consume over 40 g/day. Considering the high alcohol consumption among the study participants, a significant relationship may not have been observed in this study.

In this study, weight loss was selected as an indicator of fluid loss. Heavy sweating is often a symptom of fluid loss [22, 23], as heat acclimation adjusts the body’s sweating mechanism (such as the threshold body temperature for sweating) [39]. Notably, because the amount of abnormal sweating varies greatly among individuals, the subjective index was judged to be unreliable. In addition, the amount of sweat produced depends on the state of hydration, and progressive dehydration results in lower sweat production [20]. Nevertheless, a previous study stated that dehydration over 1.5% could reduce performance, even during short-duration exercise [40]. Therefore, weight loss can be considered an indicator of dehydration.

This study has some limitations. First, we did not consider each individual’s workload. The risks of HRI should be considered based on environmental conditions and workloads [41]. Detected HRI symptoms differed between each site. We considered that all participants engaged in a heavy workload during training from additional hearing; however, we could not estimate the actual workload in each study site. Therefore, the estimation of workload as an objective method should be further studied. Second, this study targeted only firefighters. As previously mentioned, firefighters engage in special working shifts and are exposed to heavy workloads on a daily basis. Therefore, a simple generalization of this result requires caution; however, results obtained in a population that is adapted to such harsh environments are likely to provide suggestions for other populations as well. Third, the participants in the study belong to one fire department. Target populations were not large enough so, we conducted repeated measurements. Conversely, the current result should be treated with caution considering the volume of the data generated in the study.

Conclusion

Our results indicate that inappropriate timing of salt intake may increase the risks of HRI. Thus, timely intake of salt in adequate amounts may prevent these risks. Adequate timing and amount of salt intake should be investigated in future studies.

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank Editage (www.editage.com) for English language editing.

Data Availability

The minimal anonymized data set necessary to replicate our study is available at Zenodo (DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.10280250).

Funding Statement

This work was supported by JSPS KAKENHI(https://www.jsps.go.jp/english/index.html) grant number 21K10449 (TK). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

References

  • 1.Ebi KL, Capon A, Berry P, Broderick C, de Dear R, Havenith G, et al. Hot weather and heat extremes: health risks. Lancet. 2021;398(10301):698–708. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(21)01208-3 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.García-Trabanino R, Jarquín E, Wesseling C, Johnson RJ, González-Quiroz M, Weiss I, et al. Heat stress, dehydration, and kidney function in sugarcane cutters in El Salvador—A cross-shift study of workers at risk of Mesoamerican nephropathy. Environ Res. 2015;142:746–55. Epub 20150723. doi: 10.1016/j.envres.2015.07.007 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Kjellstrom T, Maître N, Saget C, Otto M, Karimova T. Working on a warmer planet: The effect of heat stress on productivity and decent work 2019. [updated 2019-07-01; cited 2022 June 15]. Available from: https://www.ilo.org/global/publications/books/WCMS_711919/lang—en/index.htm. [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Runkle JD, Cui C, Fuhrmann C, Stevens S, Del Pinal J, Sugg MM. Evaluation of wearable sensors for physiologic monitoring of individually experienced temperatures in outdoor workers in southeastern U.S. Environment International. 2019;129:229–38. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.World Health Organization. Health factors involved in working under conditions of heat stress: report of a WHO scientific group. Geneva 1969. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Ministry of Health Labour and Welfare Japan. The 13th Occupational Safety & Health Program 2018. [cited 2021 May 17]. Available from: https://www.mhlw.go.jp/content/11200000/000341159.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Ministry of Health Labour and Welfare Japan. Combat Heatstroke at work -Fight against heat illness- 2022. [cited 2022 May 17]. Available from: https://www.mhlw.go.jp/content/11200000/000918439.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Koshi S. A basic framework of working environment control for occupational health in Japan. Ind Health. 1996;34(3):149–65. doi: 10.2486/indhealth.34.149 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Ueno S, Sakakibara Y, Hisanaga N, Oka T, Yamaguchi-Sekino S. Heat Strain and Hydration of Japanese Construction Workers during Work in Summer. Annals of Work Exposures and Health. 2018;62(5):571–82. doi: 10.1093/annweh/wxy012 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Kakamu T, Hidaka T, Hayakawa T, Kumagai T, Jinnouchi T, Tsuji M, et al. Risk and preventive factors for heat illness in radiation decontamination workers after the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant accident. Journal of Occupational Health. 2015;57(4):331–8. doi: 10.1539/joh.14-0218-OA [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Wendt DL, Van Loon LJC, Van Marken Lichtenbelt WD. Thermoregulation during Exercise in the Heat. Sports Medicine. 2007;37(8):669–82. doi: 10.2165/00007256-200737080-00002 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Piil JF, Lundbye-Jensen J, Christiansen L, Ioannou L, Tsoutsoubi L, Dallas CN, et al. High prevalence of hypohydration in occupations with heat stress-Perspectives for performance in combined cognitive and motor tasks. PLoS One. 2018;13(10):e0205321. Epub 20181024. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0205321 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC6200230. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Ciuha U, Pogačar T, Bogataj LK, Gliha M, Nybo L, Flouris AD, et al. Interaction between Indoor Occupational Heat Stress and Environmental Temperature Elevations during Heat Waves. Weather, Climate, and Society. 2019;11(4):755–62. doi: 10.1175/wcas-d-19-0024.1 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Takeyama H, Itani T, Tachi N, Sakamura O, Murata K, Inoue T, et al. Effects of shift schedules on fatigue and physiological functions among firefighters during night duty. Ergonomics. 2005;48(1):1–11. doi: 10.1080/00140130412331303920 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Tabuchi S, Horie S, Kawanami S, Inoue D, Morizane S, Inoue J, et al. Efficacy of ice slurry and carbohydrate–electrolyte solutions for firefighters. Journal of Occupational Health. 2021;63(1):e12263. doi: 10.1002/1348-9585.12263 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Prezant DJ, Malley KS, Barker RL, Guerth C, Kelly KJ. Thermal protective uniforms and hoods: impact of design modifications and water content on burn prevention in New York City firefighters: laboratory and field results. Inj Prev. 2001;7 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):i43-9. doi: 10.1136/ip.7.suppl_1.i43 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC1765413. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Havenith G. Heat balance when wearing protective clothing. Ann Occup Hyg. 1999;43(5):289–96. . [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Endo S, Kakamu T, Sato S, Hidaka T, Kumagai T, Nakano S, et al. Preventive measures and lifestyle habits against exertional heat illness in radiation decontamination workers. Journal of Occupational Health. 2017;59(5):428–32. doi: 10.1539/joh.17-0051-OA [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Lau WY, Kato H, Nosaka K. Effect of oral rehydration solution versus spring water intake during exercise in the heat on muscle cramp susceptibility of young men. Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition. 2021;18(1). doi: 10.1186/s12970-021-00414-8 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.NIOSH. NIOSH criteria for a recommended standard: occupational exposure to heat and hot environments.Occupational Exposure to Heat and Hot Environments | NIOSH | CDC. Jacklitsch B WW, Musolin K, Coca A, Kim J-H, Turner N., editor. Cincinnati, OH: U.S.: Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, DHHS (NIOSH); 2016. 2020-07–15T06:59:11Z. [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Meshi EB, Kishinhi SS, Mamuya SH, Rusibamayila MG. Thermal Exposure and Heat Illness Symptoms among Workers in Mara Gold Mine, Tanzania. Annals of Global Health. 2018;84(3):360–8. doi: 10.29024/aogh.2318 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Kiatkitroj K, Arphorn S, Tangtong C, Maruo SJ, Ishimaru T. Risk factors associated with heat-related illness among sugarcane farmers in Thailand. Industrial Health. 2021. doi: 10.2486/indhealth.2021-0161 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Spector JT, Krenz J, Blank KN. Risk Factors for Heat-Related Illness in Washington Crop Workers. Journal of Agromedicine. 2015;20(3):349–59. doi: 10.1080/1059924X.2015.1047107 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Kobayashi S, Honda S, Murakami K, Sasaki S, Okubo H, Hirota N, et al. Both Comprehensive and Brief Self-Administered Diet History Questionnaires Satisfactorily Rank Nutrient Intakes in Japanese Adults. Journal of Epidemiology. 2012;22(2):151–9. doi: 10.2188/jea.je20110075 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Japan Meteorological Agency. Past weather data [cited 2022 July 11]. Available from: https://www.data.jma.go.jp/obd/stats/etrn/index.php.
  • 26.R Development Core Team. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing; Vienna, Austria.2016. [cited 2022 March 7]. Available from: https://www.R-project.org. [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Saijo Y, Ueno T, Hashimoto Y. Twenty-four-hour shift work, depressive symptoms, and job dissatisfaction among Japanese firefighters. American Journal of Industrial Medicine. 2008;51(5):380–91. doi: 10.1002/ajim.20571 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Lee M, Ohde S, Urayama KY, Takahashi O, Fukui T. Weather and Health Symptoms. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2018;15(8). Epub 20180806. doi: 10.3390/ijerph15081670 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC6122079. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Areda D, Chigerwe M, Crossley B. Bovine herpes virus type-4 infection among postpartum dairy cows in California: risk factors and phylogenetic analysis. Epidemiol Infect. 2018;146(7):904–12. Epub 20180410. doi: 10.1017/S0950268818000791 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC9184933. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Japan MoHLaW. HealthyJapan21,2ndseries 2012. [cited 2022 July 3]. Available from: https://www.mhlw.go.jp/file/06-Seisakujouhou-10900000-Kenkoukyoku/0000047330.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Omouessi ST, Lemamy GJ, Kiki-Mvouaka S, Fernette B, Falconetti C, Ndeboko B, et al. Fluid deprivation increases isotonic NaCl intake, but not hypertonic salt intake, under normal and heated conditions in obese Zucker rats. Appetite. 2016;97:111–9. doi: 10.1016/j.appet.2015.11.022 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Takeyama H, Itani T, Tachi N, Sakamura O, Murata K, Inoue T, et al. Effects of a Modified Ambulance Night Shift System on Fatigue and Physiological Function among Ambulance Paramedics. Journal of Occupational Health. 2009;51(3):204–9. doi: 10.1539/joh.l7040 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Nose H, Mack GW, Shi XR, Nadel ER. Role of osmolality and plasma volume during rehydration in humans. J Appl Physiol (1985). 1988;65(1):325–31. doi: 10.1152/jappl.1988.65.1.325 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.González-Alonso J, Heaps CL, Coyle EF. Rehydration after exercise with common beverages and water. Int J Sports med. 1992;13(5):399–406. doi: 10.1055/s-2007-1021288 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.de W HE, He F, Macgregor G. Plasma sodium and hypertension. Kidney International. 2004;66(6):2454–66. doi: 10.1111/j.1523-1755.2004.66018.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Williams WJ, Schneider SM, Gretebeck RJ, Lane HW, Stuart CA, Whitson PA. Effect of dietary sodium on fluid/electrolyte regulation during bed rest. Aviat Space Environ Med. 2003;74(1):37–46. . [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Vella LD, Cameron-Smith D. Alcohol, athletic performance and recovery. Nutrients. 2010;2(8):781–9. Epub 20100727. doi: 10.3390/nu2080781 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC3257708. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.O’Keefe SJ, Marks V. Lunchtime gin and tonic a cause of reactive hypoglycaemia. Lancet. 1977;1(8025):1286–8. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(77)91321-6 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Wijayanto T, Toramoto S, Wakabayashi H, Tochihara Y. Effects of duration of stay in temperate area on thermoregulatory responses to passive heat exposure in tropical south-east Asian males residing in Japan. J Physiol Anthropol. 2012;31(1):25. Epub 20120913. doi: 10.1186/1880-6805-31-25 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC3514345. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Grantham J, Cheung SS, Connes P, Febbraio MA, Gaoua N, González-Alonso J, et al. Current knowledge on playing football in hot environments. Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2010;20 Suppl 3:161–7. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0838.2010.01216.x . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Notley SR, Flouris AD, Kenny GP. On the use of wearable physiological monitors to assess heat strain during occupational heat stress. Applied Physiology, Nutrition, and Metabolism = Physiologie Appliquee, Nutrition Et Metabolisme. 2018;43(9):869–81. doi: 10.1139/apnm-2018-0173 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Decision Letter 0

William M Adams

28 Mar 2023

PONE-D-23-02599Inappropriate timing of salt intake increases the risk of heat-related illness: An observational studyPLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Kakamu,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript by May 12 2023 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

William M. Adams

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. Thank you for stating the following in the Acknowledgments Section of your manuscript:

“We would like to thank Editage (www.editage.com) for English language editing.

This work was supported by JSPS KAKENHI (grant number 21K10449).”

We note that you have provided funding information that is currently declared in your Funding Statement. However, funding information should not appear in the Acknowledgments section or other areas of your manuscript. We will only publish funding information present in the Funding Statement section of the online submission form.

Please remove any funding-related text from the manuscript and let us know how you would like to update your Funding Statement. Currently, your Funding Statement reads as follows:

“This work was supported by JSPS KAKENHI(https://www.jsps.go.jp/english/index.html) grant number 21K10449 (TK). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.”

Please include your amended statements within your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf.

3. Please review your reference list to ensure that it is complete and correct. If you have cited papers that have been retracted, please include the rationale for doing so in the manuscript text, or remove these references and replace them with relevant current references. Any changes to the reference list should be mentioned in the rebuttal letter that accompanies your revised manuscript. If you need to cite a retracted article, indicate the article’s retracted status in the References list and also include a citation and full reference for the retraction notice.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Partly

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: Thank you very much for the opportunity to review this very interesting paper.

However, I believe that two main points need to be fundamentally modified

(1) Sample size

The main analysis is a multivariate logistic analysis with 7 covariates, but you have not considered whether the sample size of 28 participants is sufficient for statistical analysis.

I apologize if the number of participants is incorrect. However, even in that case, it is difficult to understand the attributes of the participants, and we would appreciate clarification.

2) Attributes of each group in the Salt intake

Since the details of each of the groups are not clear, it is not possible to determine whether Salt intake can be considered a significant factor.

I am sure there are other points to consider, but if you are going to submit a revised submission, I would appreciate it if you could respond to the above two points as soon as possible and then review it again.

Reviewer #2: 1. Specific errors here:

37 line: indiacte

73 line: minimze

84-85 line: salt intake in HRI aims

89 line: emphasizing

102: in accordance with

239: may actually

271: a daily basis

2. Material and Methods /

2.1. Study design and participants.

Please include inclusion criteria, heat acclimation criteria. Describe the selected Fukushima Prefectural Fire Department sites, total number of possible participants. Add in the annexes the Informed Consent and the Approval of the Ethics Committee.

2.3 Data Collection.

Please add in the annexes the questionnaires before and after the training, also clarify how they took the value during the training.

Define the variables contained between lines 111 to 114. Define the parameters under which HRI was defined. How the salt tablets were prepared and how they were administered.

Define how weight and height measurements were taken, what equipment was used.

What information was taken from the medical history.

Add the BDHQ questionnaire, which method was used to calculate alcohol consumption, number of responses not given.

Were the dietitians previously trained?

Were the weather conditions evaluated with those taken at the site and their relationship with HRI?

3. Results.

How did you calculate the concentration of salt in the diet and if you took salt tablets, how and at what time?

It would be possible to add more sociodemographic information by site, including gender, to Table 1.

What time of day did the training take place?

In table 3, can the information be disaggregated by each site?

How was the information collected during the training?

4. Conclusion

It is suggested to support the conclusions with part of the information placed in the summary.

5. Additional comments for the author.

Personally, I consider it to be excellent research whose results will help improve the treatment and prevention of HRI.

I believe that the research has much more data to contribute, which were taken during the field work, it is possible that its analysis and a more robust correlation of the variables could increase the conclusions, achieving greater indications for the prevention of this pathology. .

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

**********

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

PLoS One. 2024 Jan 2;19(1):e0296388. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0296388.r002

Author response to Decision Letter 0


25 Apr 2023

Response to reviewer

Dear Reviewers,

We appreciate for your constructive comments on our paper. We have carefully revised the manuscript text based on your comments. The point to point responses are below.

Reviewer #1: Thank you very much for the opportunity to review this very interesting paper.

However, I believe that two main points need to be fundamentally modified

(1) Sample size

The main analysis is a multivariate logistic analysis with 7 covariates, but you have not considered whether the sample size of 28 participants is sufficient for statistical analysis.

I apologize if the number of participants is incorrect. However, even in that case, it is difficult to understand the attributes of the participants, and we would appreciate clarification.

Response: To clarify, there were 28 study participants. In total, they recorded outdoor training for 250 days. The sample size sufficient for statistical analysis was 250 working days. In the Methods section of the revised manuscript, we have mentioned the total sample size.

2) Attributes of each group in the Salt intake

Since the details of each of the groups are not clear, it is not possible to determine whether Salt intake can be considered a significant factor.

Response: We apologize for this lack of explanation. We have added this detail in the revised manuscript.

I am sure there are other points to consider, but if you are going to submit a revised submission, I would appreciate it if you could respond to the above two points as soon as possible and then review it again.

Response: Thank you for your comments. We have carefully reviewed your comments and addressed them in the revised manuscript.

Reviewer #2: 1. Specific errors here:

37 line: indiacte

73 line: minimze

84-85 line: salt intake in HRI aims

89 line: emphasizing

102: in accordance with

239: may actually

271: a daily basis

Response: We apologize for these typographical errors. We have corrected them in the revised manuscript. In addition, we have had the manuscript checked by a native English speaker from a professional editing company to ensure that there are no remaining grammatical or syntax errors. We hope that the revised manuscript is now suitable for publication.

2. Material and Methods /

2.1. Study design and participants.

Please include inclusion criteria, heat acclimation criteria. Describe the selected Fukushima Prefectural Fire Department sites, total number of possible participants. Add in the annexes the Informed Consent and the Approval of the Ethics Committee.

Response: In the revised manuscript, we have detailed the inclusion criteria, heat acclimation criteria, selected fire department, total number of fire departments, and recruited subjects. We have also submitted the annexes you have mentioned to the editorial office.

2.3 Data Collection.

Please add in the annexes the questionnaires before and after the training, also clarify how they took the value during the training.

Response: The original version of the questionnaire is written in Japanese. In this resubmission, we have submitted the questionnaire as an annexed file. Participants administered to questionnaire after the training.

Define the variables contained between lines 111 to 114. Define the parameters under which HRI was defined. How the salt tablets were prepared and how they were administered.

Response: As per your comment, we have clarified the definition of HRI in the Statistical analysis section . Details regarding the salt tablets are described in line 131.

Define how weight and height measurements were taken, what equipment was used.

Response: Data on height were obtained from health checkup records. Body weight was measured using Body Composition Analyzer BS-230 (Dretech Co., Ltd, Saitama, Japan). We added these details in the revised manuscript (lines 127–128).

What information was taken from the medical history.

Response: From the medical history, we collected information on the history of hypertension and diabetes mellitus because these diseases increase the risk of HRI.

Add the BDHQ questionnaire, which method was used to calculate alcohol consumption, number of responses not given.

Response: We cannot provide the BDHQ as it is a copyrighted material. We have instead included a reference paper demonstrating the reliability of the BDHQ in nutritional surveys.

Were the dietitians previously trained?

Response: Yes, one dietitian (co-author TI) was trained to evaluate the BDHQ.

Were the weather conditions evaluated with those taken at the site and their relationship with HRI?

Response: Yes, daily maximum WBGT was included as a confounding factor, and it indicated a negative result.

3. Results.

How did you calculate the concentration of salt in the diet and if you took salt tablets, how and at what time?

Response: The concentration of salt in the diet was estimated from the BDHQ. The BDHQ was administered in the beginning of July.

It would be possible to add more sociodemographic information by site, including gender, to Table 1.

Response: All firefighters in the study department were men. Since one participant trained at multiple sites, the demographic data for each site could not be described.

What time of day did the training take place?

Response: The fire department scheduled training time twice daily (morning and afternoon), and all firefighter engaged training once in a day without emergency dispatch.

In table 3, can the information be disaggregated by each site?

Response: We have added more information in Table 3 and corrected a typographical error. However, this error did not affect the results of logistic regression analysis.

How was the information collected during the training?

Response: As described in lines 118-119, study participants answered a self-administered questionnaire before and after training.

4. Conclusion

It is suggested to support the conclusions with part of the information placed in the summary.

Response: Yes, we have revised the conclusions section and unified the content with that in the Abstract.

5. Additional comments for the author.

Personally, I consider it to be excellent research whose results will help improve the treatment and prevention of HRI.

I believe that the research has much more data to contribute, which were taken during the field work, it is possible that its analysis and a more robust correlation of the variables could increase the conclusions, achieving greater indications for the prevention of this pathology.

Response: Thank you for your favorable review of our manuscript. We have carefully revised our paper to sufficiently address all your comments.

Attachment

Submitted filename: Response_to_reviewer 20230425.docx

Decision Letter 1

William M Adams

6 Jun 2023

PONE-D-23-02599R1Inappropriate timing of salt intake increases the risk of heat-related illness: An observational studyPLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Kakamu,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

==============================

ACADEMIC EDITOR: 

  • Please address the comments and concerns posed by Reviewer #1

==============================

Please submit your revised manuscript by Jul 21 2023 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

William M. Adams

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

Please review your reference list to ensure that it is complete and correct. If you have cited papers that have been retracted, please include the rationale for doing so in the manuscript text, or remove these references and replace them with relevant current references. Any changes to the reference list should be mentioned in the rebuttal letter that accompanies your revised manuscript. If you need to cite a retracted article, indicate the article’s retracted status in the References list and also include a citation and full reference for the retraction notice.

Additional Editor Comments:

Please address the comments and concerns posed by reviewer #1.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #1: All comments have been addressed

Reviewer #2: All comments have been addressed

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: The description of the statistical analysis is still confusing.

Regarding the sample size, which we pointed out in the last issue, the process of calculating the required number of 250 cases is not clear.

However, if I were to accept your assertion, then 28 participants would require 250 cases, which would mean multiple data collections from a single patient.

From the statement "Table 4. logistic regression analysis of heat-related illness risk.", I assume that a multivariate logistic analysis was performed.

However, in principle, in a multivariate logistic analysis, the outcome is measured once per patient.

From your description, I can only follow the above inference. From this inference, I cannot say that you have performed the statistical analysis correctly, and I have no choice but to reject your paper.

Reviewer #2: All my comments, questions, concerns and recommendations were fully resolved. It is an excellent article. I appreciate the opportunity given for its review and congratulations to the authors.

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

**********

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

Decision Letter 2

Timothy Omara

6 Nov 2023

PONE-D-23-02599R2Inappropriate timing of salt intake increases the risk of heat-related illness: An observational studyPLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Kakamu,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

ACADEMIC EDITOR:Dear Authors,Kindly address the concern of Reviewer 1 on your submission. Specifically, you need to explain why the switch of the regression methods of statistical analysis. I would strongly suggest that you give:1. Some supporting citation(s) for the new statistical approach adopted.2. Limitations of the study, clearly indicating that the results reported should be treated with caution considering the volume of the data generated in the study.3. Directions for future research under CONCLUSIONS.  Please submit your revised manuscript by Dec 21 2023 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Timothy Omara, PhD

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

Please review your reference list to ensure that it is complete and correct. If you have cited papers that have been retracted, please include the rationale for doing so in the manuscript text, or remove these references and replace them with relevant current references. Any changes to the reference list should be mentioned in the rebuttal letter that accompanies your revised manuscript. If you need to cite a retracted article, indicate the article’s retracted status in the References list and also include a citation and full reference for the retraction notice.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #1: All comments have been addressed

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Partly

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: I Don't Know

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: No

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: I addressed the questions regarding logistic analysis and study design in the previous peer review.

I had expected that you would revise the study design, but you have utilized a different statistical technique.

There was no response to my comments on what led to the use of this statistical technique.

Since I am not a statistician, I cannot judge the validity of the conclusions you have drawn from the results of this analysis without comment.

I have assigned a Major Revision for this peer review.

If the manuscript is to be resubmitted, it needs to be evaluated by reviewers other than me.

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

**********

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

PLoS One. 2024 Jan 2;19(1):e0296388. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0296388.r006

Author response to Decision Letter 2


11 Dec 2023

Response to the reviewer

Dear Editor,

We appreciate your constructive comments on our paper. We have carefully revised the manuscript text based on your comments. We explained why we selected mixed-effect model in the response for reviewer #1.

1. Some supporting citation(s) for the new statistical approach adopted.

Response: Thank you for your suggestion. We added references that support our new statistical method (citation No28 and 29).

2. Limitations of the study, clearly indicating that the results reported should be treated with caution considering the volume of the data generated in the study.

Response: We have noted the need for caution regarding the handling of the results in the limitation section.

3. Directions for future research under CONCLUSIONS.

Response: We added sentence in conclusions section.

Dear Reviewers,

We appreciate your constructive comments on our paper. We have carefully revised the manuscript text based on your comments. Our point-to-point responses are below.

Reviewer #1: I addressed the questions regarding logistic analysis and study design in the previous peer review.

I had expected that you would revise the study design, but you have utilized a different statistical technique.

There was no response to my comments on what led to the use of this statistical technique.

Since I am not a statistician, I cannot judge the validity of the conclusions you have drawn from the results of this analysis without comment.

I have assigned a Major Revision for this peer review.

If the manuscript is to be resubmitted, it needs to be evaluated by reviewers other than me.

Response: The mixed-effects model is a statistical method used in studies where the same individual is measured repeatedly, such as in the current study. Information that can identify individuals and information that takes the same value for multiple subjects are referred to as fixed effects, while information that varies by measurement is treated as random effects and incorporated as variables. We have added a citation for a paper that utilizes these mixed-effects models.

Attachment

Submitted filename: Response_to_reviewer_1211.docx

Decision Letter 3

Timothy Omara

13 Dec 2023

Inappropriate timing of salt intake increases the risk of heat-related illness: An observational study

PONE-D-23-02599R3

Dear Dr. Kakamu,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Timothy Omara, PhD

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Acceptance letter

Timothy Omara

20 Dec 2023

PONE-D-23-02599R3

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Kakamu,

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now being handed over to our production team.

At this stage, our production department will prepare your paper for publication. This includes ensuring the following:

* All references, tables, and figures are properly cited

* All relevant supporting information is included in the manuscript submission,

* There are no issues that prevent the paper from being properly typeset

If revisions are needed, the production department will contact you directly to resolve them. If no revisions are needed, you will receive an email when the publication date has been set. At this time, we do not offer pre-publication proofs to authors during production of the accepted work. Please keep in mind that we are working through a large volume of accepted articles, so please give us a few weeks to review your paper and let you know the next and final steps.

Lastly, if your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at customercare@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Timothy Omara

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response_to_reviewer 20230425.docx

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response_to_reviewer 0821.docx

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response_to_reviewer_1211.docx

    Data Availability Statement

    The minimal anonymized data set necessary to replicate our study is available at Zenodo (DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.10280250).


    Articles from PLOS ONE are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES