Cardiac autonomic function during hypothermia and its measurement repeatability
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examined the effect of mild hypothermia (a 0.5 °C decrease in rectal temperature) on heart rate variability (HRV), with the identical hypothermia protocol performed twice and compared using intraclass correlation coefficient (r) analysis to study the repeatability. Twelve healthy males each completed 1 neutral (23 °C) and 2 cold (0 °C) trials. In the neutral trial, participants sat quietly for 30 min. In the cold trials, baseline data were obtained from a 5-min sample following 30 min of quiet sitting at 23 °C, followed by passive exposure to 0 °C; hypothermic measures were taken from a 5-min period immediately prior to rectal temperature decreasing by 0.5 °C. HRV was obtained from a 3-lead electrocardiogram. There were no differences (all p > 0.05) in baseline measures between the neutral and the 2 cold trials, suggesting no precooling anxiety related to the cold trials. Heart rate, together with HRV measures (i.e., root mean square difference of successive normal RR intervals, triangular interpolation of NN interval histogram, low-frequency oscillations (LF), and high-frequency oscillations (HF)), increased (all p < 0.05) with mild hypothermia and showed excellent reliability between the 2 cold trials (all r ≥ 0.81). In contrast, the LF/HF ratio decreased (p < 0.05) and had only fair reliability between the 2 cold trials (r = 0.551). In general, hypothermia led to increases in heart rate, together with most measures of HRV. Although it was counterintuitive that both sympathetic and vagal influences would increase simultaneously, these changes likely reflected increased stress from whole-body cooling, together with marked cardiovascular strain and sympathetic nervous system activity from shivering to defend core body temperature. An important methodological consideration for future studies is the consistent and repeatable HRV responses to hypothermia.
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".