MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2273032719

Motion-sickness medications for aircrew: impact on psychomotor performance.

2005· article· en· W2273032719 on OpenAlexaff
Michel A Paul, Mike MacLellan, Gary Gray

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicVirtual Reality Applications and Impacts
Canadian institutionsDefence Research and Development Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPromethazineMotion sicknessAircrewPseudoephedrinePsychomotor learningMedicineAnesthesiaEphedrinePsychiatryCognition
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Motion sickness remains a significant problem for aircrew both in the flying environment (airsickness) and for aircrew deployed at sea (seasickness). While some anti-motion-sickness medications provide reasonable efficacy, adverse neurocognitive effects limit their use in military personnel engaged in safety-sensitive operational roles such as flying. The purpose of this study was to assess the impact on psychomotor performance of promethazine, meclizine, and dimenhydrinate and to determine if the addition of pseudoephedrine or damphetamine to promethazine would ameliorate its adverse effects. METHODS: There were 21 subjects (11 men, 10 women), aged 22-59, who were assessed for psychomotor performance on 4 tasks as well as with sleepiness and drug side-effects questionnaires. Psychomotor testing was conducted prior to, and for 7 h after, ingestion of a single dose of each of placebo, promethazine 25 mg, meclizine 50 mg, dimenhydrinate 50 mg, promethazine 25 mg plus pseudoephedrine 60 mg, and promethazine 25 mg plus d-amphetamine 10 mg. RESULTS: Relative to placebo, promethazine, meclizine, and promethazine plus pseudoephedrine impaired performance on all four tasks [serial reaction time (SRT), logical reasoning (LRT), serial subraction (SST), and multitask (MT)]. Dimenhydrinate impaired performance on the SRT only. Promethazine plus d-amphetamine did not impair performance on any task nor did it result in increased sleepiness. The times to recovery of normal performance for SRT with promethazine, meclizine, dimenhydrinate, and promethazine plus pseudoephedrine were > 7.25, 7.25, 4.25, and 7.25 h, respectively; for LRT were > 7.25, > 7.25, ns, and 7.25 h; for SST were > 7.25, > 7.25, ns, and 7.25 h; for MT were 7.25, 7.25, ns, and 7.25 h. Recovery times to baseline sleepiness levels for promethazine, meclizine, dimenhydrinate, and promethazine plus pseudoephedrine were 7.25, > 7.25, 6.25, and > 7.25 h. CONCLUSION: Only promethazine plus d-amphetamine was free from impact on psychomotor performance and did not increase sleepiness.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.977
Threshold uncertainty score0.376

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 communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations26
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicVirtual Reality Applications and ImpactsFrench-language works237,207