MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1953663339 · doi:10.1088/0967-3334/36/7/n103

Non-invasive measurement of tibialis anterior muscle temperature during rest, cycling exercise and post-exercise recovery

2015· article· en· W1953663339 on OpenAlexaff
Andreas D. Flouris, Petros C. Dinas, Kiriakos Tsitoglou, Ioanna Patramani, Yiannis Koutedakis, Glen P. Kenny

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysiological Measurement · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicThermoregulation and physiological responses
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersDirectorate-General for Research and InnovationFP7 People: Marie-Curie ActionsEuropean Commission
KeywordsSupine positionCyclingMedicineTibialis anterior muscleHeart rateMean differenceRest (music)CardiologyInternal medicineConfidence intervalSkeletal muscleBlood pressure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We introduce a non-invasive and accurate method to assess tibialis anterior muscle temperature (Tm) during rest, cycling exercise, and post-exercise recovery using the insulation disk (INDISK) technique. Twenty-six healthy males (23.6 ± 6.2 years; 24.1 ± 3.1 body mass index) were randomly allocated into the 'model' (n = 16) and the 'validation' (n = 10) groups. Participants underwent 20 min supine rest, 20 min cycling exercise at 60% of age-predicted maximum heart rate, and 20 min supine post-exercise recovery. In the model group, Tm (34.55 ± 1.02 °C) was greater than INDISK temperature (Tid; 32.44 ± 1.23 °C; p < 0.001) and skin surface temperature (Tsk; 29.84 ± 1.47 °C; p < 0.001) throughout the experimental protocol. The strongest prediction model (R(2) = 0.646) incorporated Tid and the difference between the current Tid temperature and that recorded four minutes before. No mean difference (p > 0.05) and a strong correlation (r = 0.804; p < 0.001) were observed between Tm and predicted Tm (predTm) in the model group. Cross-validation analyses in the validation group demonstrated no mean difference (p > 0.05), a strong correlation (r = 0.644; p < 0.001), narrow 95% limits of agreement (-0.06 ± 1.51), and low percent coefficient of variation (2.24%) between Tm (34.39 ± 1.00 °C) and predTm (34.45 ± 0.73 °C). We conclude that the novel technique accurately predicts Tm during rest, cycling exercise, and post-exercise recovery, providing a valid and cost-efficient alternative when direct Tm measurement is not feasible.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations9
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysiological MeasurementSame topicThermoregulation and physiological responsesFrench-language works237,207