Effects of simulated prolonged restrained sitting on physical and physiological states
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Advancement in aerospace technology, and resultant change in operational capabilities has posed unique challenges on the aircrew, who is required to operate for prolonged periods seated and restrained. Examination of the effects of prolonged restrained sitting on physical and physiological states was the desired objective of the study. Material and Methods: Longitudinal evaluation of subjective appreciation of physical discomfort and pain, and physiological parameters, namely, heart rate (HR), blood pressure (BP), oxygen saturation (SpO2), skin temperature, and calf girth changes across 6-h of simulated prolonged restrained sitting was undertaken among 15 healthy male non aircrew volunteers with mean age of 31.2 ± 3.63 years. Subjective discomfort was assessed by Category Partitioning Scale (CPS) and pain by Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire (SF-MPQ). Results: Prolonged restraint sitting of 6-h resulted in a significant increase in calf girth. Significant changes were also observed in CPS and SF-MPQ scores indicating an increase perception of discomfort and pain. Changes in HR, MAP, SpO2, and lower limb skin temperature were also observed even though these changes were lower in magnitude. Conclusion: The pain and discomfort following 6-h of prolonged restraint sitting were found to be appreciable by the subjects. This, along with a significant change in the calf circumference and other physiological parameters were possibly due to effects of venous pooling as a result of sitting for prolonged periods. The effects so observed could have potential flight safety implications and affect mission effectiveness. However, these findings need to be examined in actual cockpit conditions where the seat is more ergonomically designed; yet the aircrew is subjected to a wide spectrum of additional aeromedical stressors.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".