MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Measurement of leg fluid volume using bioelectrical impedance (1156.14)

2014· article· en· W1606606655 on OpenAlexaff
Bhajan Singh, Azadeh Yadollahi, T. Douglas Bradley

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBody Composition Measurement Techniques
Canadian institutionsToronto Rehabilitation Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBioelectrical impedance analysisAnkleExtracellular fluidMedicineVolume (thermodynamics)SittingBody waterCardiologyBiomedical engineeringAnatomyBody weightInternal medicineChemistryExtracellularBody mass indexPhysicsPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Fluid volume (FV) of body segments can be measured non‐invasively and continuously using bioelectrical impedance (BI). Electrical impedance of the cell membrane is high at low frequencies suggesting that BI using low frequencies will detect mainly extracellular fluid (ECF). The objective of this study was to determine relationships between leg FV measured using BI and changes in leg volume (LV) calculated geometrically. Methods: We measured FV between the knee and ankle using BI at low frequencies (50 & 100 KHz, Biopac) and leg circumferences at the knee, ankle and widest part of the calf in both legs of 7 healthy subjects (5 men, age 50.7±7.1 yrs, BMI 23.6±2.8 kg/m2). Measurements were made every 30 min while sitting for 4 hrs. LV was calculated geometrically by assuming a shape of a truncated cone. We also measured FV between the left knee and ankle every hour using a Xitron device that uses multiple frequencies up to 1 MHz to distinguish between ECF and intracellular fluid volumes. Paired t‐tests were used to compare changes (Δ) in Biopac FV (FV‐B) with ΔLV and Xitron measurements of ECF (ECF‐X) and total FV (TFV‐X). Findings: Relative to ΔLV, ΔFV‐B was lower in the first 2 hours of sitting (ΔLV 188.7±31.5, ΔFV‐B 79.8.9±121.3 ml, p<0.0001) but similar between 2 and 4 hours (ΔLV 68.8±45.7 ml, ΔFV‐B 56.2±22.2 ml, p=0.50). In the left leg, all estimates of ΔFV‐B were consistent with ΔECF‐X and lower than ΔTFV‐X and ΔLV (at 4 hrs, ΔFV‐B 0.06±0.01 L, ΔECF‐X 0.06±0.01 L, ΔTFV‐X 0.08±0.07 L, ΔLV 0.14±0.04 L). Conclusions: FV measured using Biopac at low frequencies seems to quantify changes in ECF volume. Expansion of ECF volume accounts for only about half the volume expansion below the knees during the first 2 hours of sitting but accounts for most of it between 2 and 4 hours.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.142
Threshold uncertainty score0.389

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.240 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB JournalSame topicBody Composition Measurement TechniquesFrench-language works237,207