MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Torso Burn Injury Does Not Exacerbate Thermoregulatory Strain During Exercise‐Heat Stress While Wearing A Military Combat Uniform

2020· article· en· W3016351409 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mads Fischer, Matthew N. Cramer, Mu Huang, Luke N. Belval, Joseph C. Watso, Frank A. Cimino, Niels H. Secher, Craig G. Crandall

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicThermoregulation and physiological responses
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTorsoMedicineBurn injuryThermoregulationHeat illnessPhysical therapyPoison controlCore temperatureTotal body surface areaTreadmillHeart rateBody surface areaPhysical medicine and rehabilitationSurgeryAnesthesiaMedical emergencyInternal medicineAnatomyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The ability to dissipate heat during exercise is impaired in individuals with grafted skin over a large portion of their body. However, it is unknown whether a torso burn injury impairs thermoregulatory function in uniformed military personnel operating in a hot environment. Purpose To evaluate whether a torso burn injury exacerbates the rise in core temperature during exercise in a hot environment while wearing a military combat uniform. Methods Ten healthy individuals (8 males) performed 60 min of treadmill walking at 5.3 km/h with 3.7 ± 0.9% grade incline (altered to maintain a rate of metabolic heat generation of ~6.0 W • kg‐1) in a 40.0 ± 0.1 °C and 20.0 ± 0.6% relative humidity climate chamber. On separate, randomized occasions, participants wore a standard U.S. Army Combat Uniform and Outer Tactical Vest (Uniform) with or without a simulated burn injury imposed by placing absorbent vapor‐impermeable material across the torso, 20% body surface area (BSA), to hinder evaporative heat dissipation (Uniform + Burn). A third trial was conducted without the uniform or simulated burn with subjects wearing athletic shorts and sports bra for females (Control). Rectal temperature and heart rate were monitored continuously, and metabolic heat production was calculated via indirect calorimetry. The change in outcome measures from baseline to the end of exercise were compared between trials with a two‐way (group × time) repeated‐measures ANOVA. Results At the end of exercise, no differences were revealed ( P > 0.05) between the Uniform versus Uniform + Burn trials in all outcome variables: increase in rectal temperature (Uniform: Δ1.16 ± 0.3°C; Uniform + Burn: Δ1.21 ± 0.4°C), thermal sensation (Uniform: 6.0 ± 0.6; Uniform + Burn: 6.2 ± 0.8), rating of perceived exertion (Uniform: 14.2 ± 2.7; Uniform + Burn: 14.1 ± 3.0) and increase in heart rate (Uniform: Δ61 ± 13; Uniform + Burn: Δ56 ± 15 bpm). In contrast, the Control trial showed lower ( P < 0.05): increases in rectal temperature (Δ0.93 ± 0.3°C), thermal sensation (4.8 ± 0.7), rating of perceived exertion (11.3 ± 2.2), and increases in heart rate (Δ44 ± 14 bpm) compared to both the Uniform and Uniform + Burn trials. Conclusion A 20% BSA simulated burn on the torso does not exacerbate thermoregulatory strain during exercise in a hot environment while wearing a military combat uniform in healthy young adults. These findings suggest that the risk of heat‐related illness in soldiers with torso burn injuries is no different than non‐injured soldiers when wearing a standard military combat uniform. Support or Funding Information This work was supported by awards from the Department of Defense (W81XWH‐15‐1‐0647 to CGC), National Institutes of Health (R01GM068865 to CGC), and a Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada Postdoctoral Fellowship (to MNC).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.230 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB JournalSame topicThermoregulation and physiological responsesFrench-language works237,207