MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2168881136 · doi:10.1080/15459624.2015.1029615

The Influence of Arc-Flash and Fire-Resistant Clothing on Thermoregulation during Exercise in the Heat

2015· article· en· W2168881136 on OpenAlexafffund
Martin P. Poirier, Robert D. Meade, Ryan McGinn, Brian J. Friesen, Stephen G. Hardcastle, Andreas D. Flouris, Glen P. Kenny

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicThermoregulation and physiological responses
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources CanadaUniversity of Ottawa
FundersHealth CanadaUniversity of Ottawa
KeywordsThermal energy storageThermoregulationFlash (photography)Materials scienceChemistryMedicineThermodynamicsArtPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We evaluated the effect of arc-flash and fire-resistant (AFR) clothing ensembles (CE) on whole-body heat dissipation during work in the heat. On 10 occasions, 7 males performed four 15-min cycling bouts at a fixed rate of metabolic heat production (400 W) in the heat (35°C), each separated by 15-min of recovery. Whole-body heat loss and metabolic heat production were measured by direct and indirect calorimetry, respectively. Body heat storage was calculated as the temporal summation of heat production and heat loss. Responses were compared in a semi-nude state and while wearing two CE styles: (1) single-piece (coveralls) and (2) two-piece (workpant + long-sleeve shirt). For group 1, there was one non-AFR single-piece CE (CE1STD) and three single-piece CE with AFR properties (CE2AFR, CE3AFR, CE4AFR). For group 2, there was one non-AFR two-piece CE (CE5STD) and four two-piece CE with AFR properties (CE6AFR, CE7AFR, CE8AFR, CE9AFR). The workpants for CE6AFR were not AFR-rated, while a cotton undershirt was also worn for conditions CE8AFR and CE9AFR and for all single-piece CE. Heat storage for all conditions (CE1STD: 328 ± 55, CE2AFR: 335 ± 87, CE3AFR: 309 ± 95, CE4AFR: 403 ± 104, CE5STD: 253 ± 78, CE6AFR: 268 ± 89, CE7AFR: 302 ± 70, CE8AFR: 360 ± 36, CE9AFR: 381 ± 99 kJ) was greater than the semi-nude state (160 ± 124 kJ) (all p ≤ 0.05). No differences were measured between single-piece uniforms (p = 0.273). Among the two-piece uniforms, heat storage was greater for CE8AFR and CE9AFR relative to CE5STD and CE6AFR (all p ≤ 0.05), but not CE7AFR (both p > 0.05). Differences between clothing styles were measured such that greater heat storage was observed in both CE1STD and CE2-4AFR relative to CE5STD. Further, heat storage was greater in CE2AFR and CE4AFR relative to CE6AFR, while it was greater in CE4AFR compared to CE7AFR. Body heat storage during work in the heat was not influenced by the use of AFR fabrics in the single- or two-piece uniforms albeit less heat was stored in the two-piece uniforms when no undershirt was worn. However, heat storage was comparable between clothing styles when an undershirt was worn with the two-piece uniform.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations19
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Occupational and Environmental HygieneSame topicThermoregulation and physiological responsesFrench-language works237,207