Intestinal temperature does not reflect rectal temperature during prolonged, intense running with cold fluid ingestion
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is generally assumed that intestinal temperature (Tint), as measured with a telemetric pill, agrees relatively well with rectal temperature (Trec) during exercise. However, whether Tint reflects Trec during prolonged, intense and continuous exercise when cold fluids are consumed is unknown. Therefore, we compared Trec and Tint during a half-marathon during which cold water was ingested to prevent bodyweight (BW) losses >2%. Nine endurance athletes (age 30 ± 5 years) underwent a 21.1 km running time-trial (TT) in the heat (~30 °C and 44% RH) while BW losses were maintained to ~1% with continuous cold (4 °C) water provision. Tint and Trec were monitored throughout the TT. Hypohydration level, TT time and fluid intake were 1.2 ± 0.4% BW, 93.2 ± 9.9 min and 2143 ± 264 ml, respectively. Trec was systematically higher than Tint by 0.25 °C (95% CI: 0.14-0.37 °C). Tint and Trec showed an excellent relative (r = 0.90, p < 0.01), but poor absolute agreement as reflected by a 95% limit of agreement of ±1.07 °C and a standard error of measurement of ±0.39 °C. In conclusion, Tint does not mirror Trec during prolonged, intense running with cold fluid ingestion and, therefore, these measures should not be used interchangeably under this scenario.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it