Hypoxia Exacerbates Negative Emotional State during Inactivity: The Effect of 21 Days Hypoxic Bed Rest and Confinement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hypoxia and confinement have both been shown to influence emotional state. It is envisaged that the inhabitants of future planetary habitats will be exposed to concomitant confinement, reduced gravity and hypoxia. We examined the independent and combined effects of a 21-day inactivity/unloading and normobaric hypoxia under confined conditions on various psychological factors. Eleven healthy men participated in three 21-day experimental campaigns designed in a cross-over manner: (1) Normobaric hypoxic ambulatory confinement, (2) Normobaric hypoxic bed rest and (3) Normobaric normoxic bed rest. The Profile of Mood States, and the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule were employed to assess the participants' psychological responses before (Pre), during (Day 7, Day 14, and Day 21) and after (Post) the confinements. The most negative psychological profile appeared on days 14 and 21 of the hypoxic bed rest campaign. A significant increase in depression, tension, and confusion was noted on days 14 and 21 of the hypoxic bed rest condition. Concomitantly, a decrease, albeit not statistically significant, in positive psychological responses was observed. The psychological profile returned to the initial level at Post following all confinements. These data suggest that the combined effect of hypoxia and bed rest induced the most negative effects on an individual's mood. However, significant intra- and inter-individual differences in psychological responses were noted and should be taken into consideration.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".