MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2072747504 · doi:10.1080/10903120902935348

Field Torso-Warming Modalities: A Comparative Study Using a Human Model

2009· article· en· W2072747504 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.

Bibliographic record

VenuePrehospital Emergency Care · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicThermal Regulation in Medicine
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineShiveringTorsoAnesthesiaHypothermiaCore temperatureAnimal science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To compare four field-appropriate torso-warming modalities that do not require alternating-current (AC) electrical power, using a human model of nonshivering hypothermia. METHODS: Five subjects, serving as their own controls, were cooled four times in 8 degrees C water for 10-30 minutes. Shivering was inhibited by buspirone (30 mg) taken orally prior to cooling and intravenous (IV) meperidine (1.25 mg/kg) at the end of immersion. Subjects were hoisted out of the water, dried, and insulated and then underwent 120 minutes of one of the following: spontaneous warming only; a charcoal heater on the chest; two flexible hot-water bags (total 4 liters of water at 55 degrees C, replenished every 20 minutes) applied to the chest and upper back; or two chemical heating pads applied to the chest and upper back. Supplemental meperidine (maximum cumulative dose of 3.5 mg/kg) was administered as required to inhibit shivering. RESULTS: The postcooling afterdrop (i.e., the continued decrease in body core temperature during the early period of warming), compared with spontaneous warming (2.2 degrees C), was less for the chemical heating pads (1.5 degrees C) and the hot-water bags (1.6 degrees C, p < 0.05) and was 1.8 degrees C for the charcoal heater. Subsequent core rewarming rates for the hot-water bags (0.7 degree C/h) and the charcoal heater (0.6 degree C/h) tended to be higher than that for the chemical heating pads (0.2 degree C/h) and were significantly higher than that for spontaneous warming rate (0.1 degrees C/h, p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: In subjects with shivering suppressed, greater sources of external heat were effective in attenuating core temperature afterdrop, whereas sustained sources of external heat effectively established core rewarming. Depending on the scenario and available resources, we recommend the use of charcoal heaters, chemical heating pads, or hot-water bags as effective means for treating cold patients in the field or during transport to definitive care.

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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.284
Threshold uncertainty score0.926

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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.394
Teacher spread0.331 · 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