Does type 1 diabetes alter post‐exercise thermoregulatory and cardiovascular function in young adults?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent data demonstrated that individuals with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) exhibit impaired sweating and increased rectal temperature (i.e., heat storage) during exercise compared with healthy controls. Our purpose in this study was to investigate the consequences of T1DM on post-exercise thermal homeostasis. Sixteen participants (eight controls matched with eight T1DM) performed 90 min of cycling followed by 60 min of seated recovery. Esophageal and rectal temperatures, sweating (forearm, chest, and upper back), skin blood flow [forearm and upper back, presented as cutaneous vascular conductance (CVC)], and blood pressure [mean arterial pressure (MAP)] were measured at baseline and throughout recovery. Esophageal temperature was similar during baseline and recovery between groups (P = 0.88). However, rectal temperature was elevated in our T1DM group throughout recovery (P = 0.05). Sweating and CVC were similar between groups at all sites from 10-min post-exercise until the end of recovery (P ≥ 0.16). While absolute MAP was similar between groups (P = 0.43), the overall decrease in MAP post-exercise was greater in controls from 20 min (T1DM: - 8 ± 5 vs control: - 13 ± 6 mmHg, P = 0.03) until the end of recovery. We conclude that despite increased heat storage during exercise, individuals with T1DM exhibit a suppression in heat loss similar to their healthy counterparts during recovery.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".