MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2090409931 · doi:10.3357/asem.2261.2008

Hypercapnia Effect on Core Cooling and Shivering Threshold During Snow Burial

2008· article· en· W2090409931 on OpenAlexaff
Colin K. Grissom, J. C. McAlpine, Christopher Harmston, Martin I. Radwin, Gordon G. Giesbrecht, Mary Beth Scholand, J. Scott Morgan

Bibliographic record

VenueAviation Space and Environmental Medicine · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicThermal Regulation in Medicine
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsShiveringHypercapniaRespiratory rateChemistryVentilation (architecture)AnesthesiaCarbon dioxideThermoregulationAnimal scienceHeart rateMedicineAcidosisMeteorologyInternal medicineGeographyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Hypercapnia during avalanche burial may increase core temperature cooling rate by decreasing the temperature threshold for shivering or by increasing respiratory heat loss. METHODS: We studied the effect of hypercapnia on rectal core temperature (T(re)) cooling rate, respiratory heat loss, heat production, and the T(re) shivering threshold during snow burial (mean snow temperature -3.2 + 2.7 degrees C) in 11 subjects. In a 60-min hypercapnic burial subjects breathed a 5% carbon dioxide and 21% oxygen inhaled gas mixture and in a separate 60-min normocapnic burial subjects breathed ambient air. After extrication from snow burial subjects were passively rewarmed in a 15 degrees C shelter and T(re) afterdrop was measured. RESULTS: The deltaT(re) over 1 h of burial in the hypercapnic study was 1.28 +/- 0.4 degrees C and in the normocapnic study was 0.97 +/- 0.4 degrees C (P = 0.045). Minute ventilation, respiratory heat loss, total metabolic rate, and metabolic rate of the respiratory muscles were greater during the hypercapnic burial. There was no difference in shivering threshold between the hypercapnic and normocapnic conditions. Afterdrop in the hypercapnic study (0.69 +/- 0.4 degrees C at 21 +/- 8.1 min after extrication) was not different than in the normocapnic study (0.86 +/- 0.3 degrees C at 23.1 +/- 5.3 min after extrication). In both the hypercapnic and normocapnic studies afterdrop cooling rate was significantly greater during extrication than during snow burial. DISCUSSION: Hypercapnia significantly increased T(re) cooling rate by increasing respiratory heat loss but did not suppress shivering. Afterdrop may significantly contribute to hypothermia during rescue of avalanche burial victims.

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 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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.387
Threshold uncertainty score0.645

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations32
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAviation Space and Environmental MedicineSame topicThermal Regulation in MedicineFrench-language works237,207