Heart rate variability dynamics during treatment for exertional heat strain when immediate response is not possible
Bibliographic record
Abstract
NEW FINDINGS: What is the central question of this study? Does a delay in cold water immersion treatment affect the cardiac autonomic control of exertionally heat-strained individuals? What is the main finding and its importance? Cold water immersion is effective for treating exertionally heat-strained individuals even when treatment is commenced with a significant delay. However, that treatment delay leads to only partial/transient restoration of cardiac autonomic control. Therefore, we recommend that exertional heatstroke patients are continuously monitored for several hours even after core temperature has returned to normal values. ABSTRACT: Immediate cold water immersion (CWI) is the gold-standard treatment for exertional heatstroke. In the field, however, treatment is often delayed, primarily owing to a delayed paramedic response and/or inaccurate diagnosis. We examined the effect of treatment (reduction of rectal temperature to 37.5°C) delays of 5 (short), 20 (moderate) and 40 (prolonged) min on cardiac autonomic control [as assessed via heart rate variability (HRV)] in eight exertionally heat-strained (40.0°C rectal temperature) individuals. Eleven HRV indices were computed that have been described commonly in the literature and characterize almost all known domains of the variability and complexity of the cardiopulmonary system. We found that the cardiac autonomic control (as assessed via HRV) of exertionally heat-strained individuals was significantly affected by the amount of time it took for the CWI treatment to be applied. Six out of 11 HRV indices studied, from all variability domains, displayed strong (P ≤ 0.005) time × delay interaction effects. Moreover, the number of significantly (P ≤ 0.005) abnormal (i.e. different from the short delay) HRV indices more than doubled (seven versus 15) from the moderate delay to the prolonged delay. Finally, our results demonstrated that a CWI treatment applied with delays of 20 and, primarily, 40 min did not lead to a full restoration of cardiac autonomic control of exertionally heat-strained individuals. In conclusion, this study supports CWI for treating exertionally heat-strained individuals even when applied with prolonged delay, but it highlights the importance of continued cardiac monitoring of patients who have suffered exertional heatstroke for several hours after restoration of core temperature to normal.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".