MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2049566782 · doi:10.1080/00140130500122276

A light-weight cooling vest enhances performance of athletes in the heat

2005· article· en· W2049566782 on OpenAlexaff
Justina Webster, EJ Holland, Gordon G. Sleivert, Raechel M. Laing, BE Niven

Bibliographic record

VenueErgonomics · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicThermoregulation and physiological responses
Canadian institutionsCanadian Sport Centre Pacific
FundersUniversity of Otago
KeywordsVESTSkin temperatureCore temperatureAthletesRectal temperatureVO2 maxMedicinePhysical therapyThermoregulationAnimal scienceSimulationMathematicsHeart rateComputer scienceBiomedical engineeringAnesthesiaInternal medicineStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During the 1990s, emphasis on the health and safety of people who exercise in hot, humid conditions increased and many organizations became aware of the need for protection against heat-related disorders. A practical, pre-cooling strategy applicable to several sporting codes, which is low cost, easy to use, light-weight and which enhances cooling of the human body prior to and following exercise, was developed and tested. Eight males and eight females participated in a maximal oxygen consumption (VO2max) test and four trials: a control (without cooling) and wearing each of three different cooling vests (A, B, C). Vests were worn during the rest, stretch, warm-up (50% VO2max) and recovery stages of the protocol, but not during the 30 min run (70% VO2max). Core and skin temperatures during exercise were reduced (by approximately 0.5 degrees C, rectal; 0.1-1.4 degrees C, abdominal skin temperature) and sweat rates were lower (by approximately 10-23%). Endurance times for running at 95% of VO2max were increased by up to 49 s. Perceptions of the thermal state and skin wetness showed changes to greater levels of satisfaction. Physiological and sensory responses were related to design features of the vests.

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)0.001
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.245 · 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

Citations95
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueErgonomicsSame topicThermoregulation and physiological responsesFrench-language works237,207