Cold Susceptibility of Digit Stumps Resulting from Amputation After Freezing Cold Injury in Elite Alpinists
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Gorjanc, Jurij, Shawnda A. Morrison, Rok Blagus, and Igor B. Mekjavic. Cold susceptibility of digit stumps resulting from amputation after freezing cold injury in elite alpinists. High Alt Med Biol. 19:185-192, 2018. AIM: The aim of the study was to assess whether previous freezing cold injury in fingers and/or toes might predispose alpinists to greater risk of further freezing cold injury, primarily due to a greater vasoconstrictor response to cold, resulting in a lower perfusion, reflected in lower skin temperature. METHODS: Ten elite alpinists (N = 10; 8 male and 2 female) with amputations after freezing cold injury participated in a cold-water (8°C) immersion stress test of the hands and feet. Digit skin temperatures of amputated digits, their noninjured counterparts, noninjured digits of the affected side and noninjured digits of the corresponding side were measured. The skin temperatures were compared during three consecutive phases of the cold stress test: prewarming, cold water immersion, and passive heating. RESULTS: Amputated toes cooled much faster compared to their uninjured counterparts (n = 26, p < 0.001), and attained lower skin temperatures during the cold exposure test (n = 26, p < 0.001). Higher cooling rate was observed in all the toes on the injured limb compared with the toes on the uninjured limb (n = 40, p < 0.001). In contrast to the toes, the fingers on the injured limb after freezing cold injury were warmer during cooling phase compared to uninjured fingers (n = 15, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The lower digit temperatures observed in affected toe stumps during the cold stress test compared to the nonamputated toes may indicate a heightened risk of future freezing cold injury with subsequent cold exposures, as a consequence of less perfusion, reflected in the lower skin temperature. This relationship was not confirmed in the fingers.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".