Thermoregulatory Responses with Size-matched Simulated Torso or Limb Skin Grafts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: This study aimed to test the hypothesis that a simulated burn injury on the torso will be no more or less detrimental to core temperature control than on the limbs during uncompensable exercise-heat stress. METHODS: Nine nonburned individuals (7 men, 2 women) completed the protocol. On separate occasions, burn injuries of identical surface area (0.45 ± 0.08 m2 or 24.4% ± 4.4% of total body surface area) were simulated on the torso or the arms/legs using an absorbent, vapor-impermeable material that impedes sweat evaporation in those regions. Participants performed 60 min of treadmill walking at 5.3 km·h-1 and a 4.1% ± 0.8% grade, targeting 6 W·kg-1 of metabolic heat production in 40.1°C ± 0.2°C and 19.6% ± 0.6% relative humidity conditions. Rectal temperature, heart rate, and perceptual responses were measured. RESULTS: Rectal temperature increased to a similar extent with simulated injuries on the torso and limbs (condition-by-time interaction, P = 0.86), with a final rectal temperature 0.9°C ± 0.3°C above baseline in both conditions. No differences in heart rate, perceived exertion, or thermal sensation were observed between conditions (condition-by-time interactions, P ≥ 0.50). CONCLUSIONS: During uncompensable exercise-heat stress, sized-matched simulated burn injuries on the torso or limbs evoke comparable core temperature, heart rate, and perceptual responses, suggesting that the risk of exertional heat illness in such environmental conditions is independent of injury location.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".