Determination of Localized Skin Temperature of the Transtibial Residual Limb
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background: Interventions to resolve thermal discomfort as a common complaint in amputees, are usually chosen based on the residual limb skin temperature while wearing prosthesis; whereas, less attention was paid to residual limb skin temperature while outside of the prosthesis. The objective of this study was to explore the localized and regional skin temperature over the transtibial residual limb (TRL) while outside of the prosthesis. Methods: Eight unilateral transtibial amputees were enrolled in this cross sectional study. Participants sat on a chair and rested for 30 minutes while their prosthesis was removed. Twelve sites were marked in four columns (anterolateral, anteromedial, posteromedial, and posterolateral) and three rows (proximal, middle, and distal) over the residual limb and used for attachment of analog thermistors. Skin temperature was recorded and compared during 11 minutes. Furthermore, the relationship of skin temperature with participants’ demographic and clinical characteristics were explored. Results: The middle and distal zones of the anteromedial column had the highest and lowest skin temperatures (29.8 and 26.3°C, p<0.05 ), respectively. The average temperature of the TRL was 27.73±0.83°C and had no significant relationships ( p>0.05 ) with participants’ demographic and clinical characteristics. Conclusions: An unequal distribution of temperature over the TRL was found with significantly higher and lower temperatures at its anterior column and distal row, respectively. This temperature pattern should be considered for thermoregulation strategies. Further investigation of the residual limb temperature while considering muscles thickness and blood perfusion rate are warranted with and without prosthesis.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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".