Fig. 3
The comparison between female and male participants for the values of electrical impedance and sweat weight, according to the current applied showed: male presented lower electrical impedance [continuous constant current (CCC), triangular pulsed current (TPC)] and higher sweat weight [CCC, sinusoidal pulsed current (SPC), TPC] in relation to female. a Comparison for electrical impedance with CCC. (Female) N = 136; 9.3 ± 4.94; 7.91 (1.12 to 38.33); 8.46 to 10.14; (Male) N = 116; 7.67 ± 3.75; 7.53 (2.3 to 22.29); 6.98 to 8.36. b Comparison for sweat weight with CCC. (Female) N = 141; 155 ± 73; 146 (0 to 425); 142 to 167; (Male) N = 119; 193 ± 104; 186 (3 to 577); 174 to 211. c Comparison for sweat weight with SPC. (Female) N = 30; 153 ± 55; 158 (46 to 267); 132 to 174; (Male) N = 25; 208 ± 74; 209 (97 to 433); 177 to 238. d Comparison for electrical impedance with TPC. (Female) N = 109; 8.57 ± 3.17; 8.16 (2.33 to 17.76); 7.97 to 9.17; (Male) N = 92; 7.2 ± 2.98; 7.18 (1.94 to 16.33); 6.58 to 7.81. e Comparison for sweat weight with TPC. (Female) N = 109; 164 ± 88; 157 (6 to 535); 148 to 181; (Male) N = 92; 206 ± 115; 189 (9 to 699); 182 to 229. All p-values were below 0.003. Data are presented in legend as: number of individuals; mean ± standard deviation; median (minimum to maximum); confidence interval for the mean value; and in figure as median (black line) and 95% confidence interval (green line). Statistical analysis conducted through Wilcoxon signed-rank test and Mann-Whitney U test of independent samples. Alpha = 0.05. The currents are shown as Ω using the following equation: [Z = VRMS / IRMS (Ω)]; Z = composite impedance (Ω); VRMS = effective voltage measured (volts root mean square); IRMS = effective current measured (current root mean square). Also, the sweat weight is shown as milligrams. There is no impedance figure with sinusoidal pulsed current because the p-value > 0.05 was observed