MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2411903548

Pre-hospital torso-warming modalities for severe hypothermia: a comparative study using a human model.

2005· article· en· W2411903548 on OpenAlexaff
Michele V Hultzer, Xiaojiang Xu, Claudia Marrao, Gerald Bristow, Alex Chochinov, Gordon G. Giesbrecht

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicThermal Regulation in Medicine
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTorsoShiveringHypothermiaCore temperatureMedicineAnesthesiaThermoregulationCore (optical fiber)Environmental scienceMaterials scienceInternal medicineAnatomy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To compare 5 active torso-warming modalities in a human model of severe hypothermia with shivering heat production inhibited by intravenous meperidine. METHODS: Six subjects were cooled on 6 different occasions each, in 8 degrees C water, for 30 minutes or to a core temperature of 35 degrees C. Spontaneous warming was the first torso-warming modality to be tested for every subject, and results served both as a comparative control and for determination of the meperidine dose for subsequent trials. Meperidine (1.5 mg/kg) was administered during the final 10 minutes of immersion to suppress shivering. Subjects were removed from the water, dried and insulated for 30 minutes, followed by 120 minutes of 1) forced-air warming with either a 600-W heater and commercial soft warming blanket; or 2) a 600-W heater and rigid cover; or 3) an 850-W heater and rigid cover; or 4) a charcoal heater on the chest; or 5) direct body-to-body contact with a normothermic partner. Supplemental meperidine (to a maximum cumulative dose of 3.2 mg/kg) was administered as required to inhibit shivering. RESULTS: The initial post-cooling afterdrop was approximately 1.0 degrees C. After 30 minutes, core temperature continued to drop by 0.45 degrees C in spontaneous and body-to-body warming modalities. This post-warming afterdrop was significantly less with 600-W heater and rigid cover and the charcoal heater (0.26 degrees C) and the least with 850-W heater and rigid cover (0.17 degrees C). Core rewarming rates were highest using 850-W heater and rigid cover (1.45 degrees C/hr), with charcoal heating and 600-W rigid heater (0.7 degrees C/hr), 600-W heater and blanket (0.57 degrees C/hr) and body-to-body warming (0.52 degrees C/hr) being more effective than spontaneous warming (0.36 degrees C/hr). CONCLUSIONS: In non-shivering subjects, external heat application was effective in attenuating core temperature afterdrop and facilitating safe core rewarming; this was more evident when heat was delivered preferentially to the chest, and dependent upon the amount of heat donated. The modalities studied appear sufficiently practical and portable for pre-hospital use and should be considered for such situations, particularly in rural or wilderness locations where anticipated transport time to the hospital exceeds 30 minutes.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.466
Threshold uncertainty score0.761

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 head0.095
GPT teacher head0.340
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 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

Citations34
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicThermal Regulation in MedicineFrench-language works237,207