MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1984788720 · doi:10.4085/1062-6050-45.5.439

Cold-Water Immersion and the Treatment of Hyperthermia: Using 38.6°C as a Safe Rectal Temperature Cooling Limit

2010· article· en· W1984788720 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

VenueJournal of Athletic Training · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicThermoregulation and physiological responses
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersUniversity of Ottawa
KeywordsImmersion (mathematics)Rectal temperatureHyperthermiaMedicineAnimal scienceAnesthesiaHeat illnessSurgeryInternal medicinePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

CONTEXT: Cold-water immersion is recommended for the immediate field treatment of exertional heat stroke. However, concerns exist over potential overcooling of hyperthermic individuals during cold-water immersion. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the recommendation that removing previously hyperthermic individuals from a cold-water bath at a rectal temperature (T(re)) of 38.6°C would attenuate overcooling. DESIGN: Controlled laboratory study. SETTING: University research laboratory. PATIENTS OR OTHER PARTICIPANTS: Participants included 6 men and 4 women (age = 22 ± 3 years, height = 172 ± 10 cm, mass = 67.8 ± 10.7 kg, body fat percentage = 17.1% ± 4.5%, maximum oxygen consumption = 59.3 ± 8.7 mL·kg(-1)·min(-1)). INTERVENTION(S): After exercising at an ambient temperature of 40.0°C for 38.5 ± 9.4 minutes, until T(re) reached 39.5°C, participants were immersed in a 2.0°C circulated water bath until T(re) decreased to either 37.5°C or 38.6°C. Subsequently, participants were removed from the water bath and recovered for 20 minutes at an ambient temperature of 25°C. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Rectal and esophageal temperatures were measured continuously during the immersion and recovery periods. RESULTS: Because of the experimental design, the overall time of immersion was greater during the 37.5°C trial (16.6 ± 5.7 minutes) than the 38.6°C trial (8.8 ± 2.6 minutes) (t(9) = -4.740, P = .001). During the recovery period after cold-water immersion, both rectal (F(1,9) = 50.540, P < .001) and esophageal (F(1,6) = 20.365, P = .007) temperatures remained greater in the 38.6°C trial than in the 37.5°C trial. This was evidenced by low points of 36.47°C ± 0.70°C and 37.19°C ± 0.71°C for rectal temperature (t(9) = 2.975, P = .016) and of 35.67°C ± 1.27°C and 36.72°C ± 0.95°C for esophageal temperature (t(6) = 3.963, P = .007) during the recovery period of the 37.5°C and 38.6°C trials, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Immersion for approximately 9 minutes to a rectal temperature cooling limit of 38.6°C negated any risk associated with overcooling hyperthermic individuals when they were immersed in 2°C water.

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)0.000
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 score0.240
Threshold uncertainty score0.182

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.258 · 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