MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4395464971 · doi:10.1038/s41526-024-00389-1

Systematic review of the effectiveness of standalone passive countermeasures on microgravity-induced physiologic deconditioning

2024· article· en· W4395464971 sur OpenAlex

Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base

Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.

affAu moins un auteur déclare une institution canadienne dans l'instantané OpenAlex épinglé.

Notice bibliographique

Revuenpj Microgravity · 2024
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueSpaceflight effects on biology
Établissements canadiensWestern UniversityQueen's University
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésSpaceflightDeconditioningBed restMedicinePhysical therapyWeightlessnessPhysical medicine and rehabilitationSystematic reviewOrthostatic intoleranceAeronauticsEngineeringHeart rateMEDLINEBlood pressureSurgeryInternal medicine

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

A systematic review of literature was conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of passive countermeasures in ameliorating the cardiopulmonary and musculoskeletal effects of gravitational unloading on humans during spaceflight. This systematic review is the third of a series being conducted by the European Space Agency to evaluate the effectiveness of countermeasures to physiologic deconditioning during spaceflight. With future long-duration space missions on the horizon, it is critical to understand the effectiveness of existing countermeasures to promote astronaut health and improve the probability of future mission success. An updated search for studies examining passive countermeasures was conducted in 2021 to supplement results from a broader search conducted in 2017 for all countermeasures. Ground-based analogue and spaceflight studies were included in the search. A total of 647 articles were screened following removal of duplicates, of which 16 were included in this review. Data extraction and analysis, quality assessment of studies, and transferability of reviewed studies to actual spaceflight based on their bed-rest protocol were conducted using dedicated tools created by the Aerospace Medicine Systematic Review Group. Of the 180 examined outcomes across the reviewed studies, only 20 were shown to have a significant positive effect in favour of the intervention group. Lower body negative pressure was seen to significantly maintain orthostatic tolerance (OT) closer to baseline as comparted to control groups. It also was seen to have mixed efficacy with regards to maintaining resting heart rate close to pre-bed rest values. Whole body vibration significantly maintained many balance-related outcome measures close to pre-bed rest values as compared to control. Skin surface cooling and centrifugation both showed efficacy in maintaining OT. Centrifugation also was seen to have mixed efficacy with regards to maintaining VO2max close to pre-bed rest values. Overall, standalone passive countermeasures showed no significant effect in maintaining 159 unique outcome measures close to their pre-bed rest values as compared to control groups. Risk of bias was rated high or unclear in all studies due to poorly detailed methodologies, poor control of confounding variables, and other sources of bias (i.e. inequitable recruitment of participants leading to a higher male:female ratios). The bed-rest transferability (BR) score varied from 2-7, with a median score of 5. Generally, most studies had good BR transferability but underreported on factors such as control of sunlight or radiation exposure, diet, level of exercise and sleep-cycles. We conclude that: (1) Lack of standardisation of outcome measurement and methodologies has led to large heterogeneity amongst studies; (2) Scarcity of literature and high risk of bias amongst existing studies limits the statistical power of results; and (3) Passive countermeasures have little or no efficacy as standalone measures against cardiopulmonary and musculoskeletal deconditioning induced by spaceflight related to physiologic deterioration due to gravity un-loading.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,002
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Expérimental (laboratoire) · Signal consensuel: Expérimental (laboratoire)
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,095
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,645

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,001
Bibliométrie0,0000,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,009
Tête enseignante GPT0,297
Écart entre enseignants0,287 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle