MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1555966755 · doi:10.1080/23328940.2015.1008890

Responses of the hands and feet to cold exposure

2015· review· en· W1555966755 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueTemperature · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicThermoregulation and physiological responses
Canadian institutionsBrock University
FundersCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsVasoconstrictionContext (archaeology)MedicineVasodilationPhysical medicine and rehabilitationAnesthesiaCardiologyHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An initial response to whole-body or local exposure of the extremities to cold is a strong vasoconstriction, leading to a rapid decrease in hand and foot temperature. This impairs tactile sensitivity, manual dexterity, and muscle contractile characteristics while increasing pain and sympathetic drive, decreasing gross motor function, occupational performance, and survival. A paradoxical and cyclical vasodilatation often occurs in the fingers, toes, and face, and this has been termed the hunting response or cold-induced vasodilatation (CIVD). Despite being described almost a century ago, the mechanisms of CIVD are still disputed; research in this area has remained largely descriptive in nature. Recent research into CIVD has brought increased standardization of methodology along with new knowledge about the impact of mediating factors such as hypoxia and physical fitness. Increasing mechanistic analysis of CIVD has also emerged along with improved modeling and prediction of CIVD responses. The present review will survey work conducted during this century on CIVD, its potential mechanisms and modeling, and also the broader context of manual function in cold conditions.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.862
Threshold uncertainty score0.391

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.076
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.301 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it