Exercise effects during diving and decompression on postdive venous gas emboli.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Exercise and diving have generally been associated with an increased risk of decompression sickness (DCS), thus accounting for the lack of studies involving exercise during decompression. However, theoretical and observational evidence contrary to this association motivated the present investigation on the effects of moderate, intermittent exercise during diving and/or during decompression on venous gas emboli (VGE) activity following a dive. HYPOTHESIS: VGE observed at both the precordium and subclavian vein sites after diving should be reduced if moderate exercise is performed during decompression vs. remaining inactive. METHODS: In a water-filled hyperbaric chamber, 39 healthy male subjects were compressed to a pressure of 450 kPa (45 msw) for 30 min followed by 55 min of staged decompression. Subjects were either active or inactive at the bottom phase (450 kPa) and/or during the decompression. Activity comprised three 5-min intervals of moderate arm or leg exercise at the bottom and five such intervals during decompression. After decompression, VGE were monitored at the precordium and subclavian vein sites using Doppler detection. Bubble activity scores were converted to various indices and analyzed using non-parametric statistics. RESULTS: VGE activity was invariant as to whether subjects were active or sedentary during the bottom phase of the dive. However, it was significantly lower for all indices examined (p < 0.05) after dives in which exercise was performed during decompression vs. inactive decompression. CONCLUSION: Moderate, intermittent physical activity during decompression decreases VGE activity after diving.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".