MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1964858098 · doi:10.1139/h01-010

Reduced Oxygen Uptake During Steady State Exercise After 21-Day Mountain Climbing Expedition to 6,194 m

2001· article· en· W1964858098 on OpenAlexaff
Maureen J. MacDonald, Howard J. Green, Heather L. Naylor, Christian Otto, Richard L. Hughson

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Applied Physiology · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicHigh Altitude and Hypoxia
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClimbClimbingSteady state (chemistry)AcclimatizationVO2 maxRespiratory exchange ratioHeart rateAnimal scienceMedicineInternal medicinePhysical therapyCardiologyChemistryBiologyPhysicsBlood pressureThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We investigated the effect of a 21-day climbing expedition to 6,194 m on the oxygen uptake (V022) and leg blood flow (LBF) responses to submaximal exercise in five healthy, fit men during two-leg kicking exercise a 0-W and 50-W. Tests were completed 1 week before and 3 days after altitued acclimatization. The adaptation of VO2 at exercise onset was described by the time to 63% of the new steady state. Steady state VO2 during 50-W exercise was less post-climb (1290+/- 29 mL/min, mean +/- SE) than pre-climb (1413+/- 63 mL/min, P <.05). VO2 adapted more slowly at the onset of 50-W exercise post climb. There were no differences in the steady state LBF during the 50-W exercise, the increase above baseline, or the adaptation post-climb. Respiratory exchange ratio was greater at 50-W post-climb compared to pre-climb. Reduced steady state V02 during exercise after exposure to high altitude is consistent with an increase in metabolic efficiency.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.208 · 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

Citations20
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Applied PhysiologySame topicHigh Altitude and HypoxiaFrench-language works237,207