MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Effect of Caffeine On Military Tasks During a Night of Sleep Loss

2004· article· en· W4234933225 on OpenAlexaff
Douglas G. Bell, Thomas M. McLellan, Gary H. Kamimori

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOccupational Health and Performance
Canadian institutionsDefence Research and Development Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEveningMorningPlaceboRating of perceived exertionCaffeineAudiologyMedicinePhysical therapyCognitionExertionPsychologyCircadian rhythmHeart rateAnesthesiaInternal medicinePsychiatryBlood pressure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

0140 Caffeine (CAF) has been shown to hasten self-paced work and improve cognitive function in both rested and sleep deprived individuals. As such, it represents an effective strategy for the military to counter the impairments in physical and cognitive function that occur during periods of sustained operations. PURPOSE: It was the purpose of this study to examine the effects of CAF on a 2-hour forced march followed by a subsequent sandbag piling task during the early evening and morning of a night of sleep loss. METHODS: Seventeen soldiers (26.9 ± 7.6 y, 83.3 ± 10.9 kg) performed a doubleblind CAF and placebo (PLAC) trial where each trial involved a control day and control sleep period followed by 30 hours of sustained wakefulness beginning on the second morning. A 400 mg dose of CAF was administered as a gum at 2130 h. At 2200 h, subjects began a 2-hour forced march at 6 km/h with a 2% grade with ambient conditions between 20–22°C. At midnight, subjects performed a sandbag piling task that involved moving 20 15-kg sandbags a distance of 6.5 m to construct a wall as fast as possible. This task involved 2 sets of completing 6 walls with a 5-min rest between sets. RESULTS: CAF had no effect on the heart rate (113.7 ± 10.4 vs 112.5 ± 10.2 b/min for PLAC and CAF, respectively), rating of perceived exertion (11.1 ± 2.1 vs 10.7 ± 2.6 for PLAC and CAF, respectively) or VO2 (1.51 ± 0.20 vs 1.55 ± 0.20 l/min for PLAC and ACF, respectively) throughout the forced march. Time to complete the 6 walls during set 1 was significantly reduced with CAF (13.0 ± 1.1 min) vs PLAC (13.8 ± 1.1 min) but there was no difference during set 2 for CAF (13.5 ± 1.6 min) or PLAC (13.6 ± 1.2 min). CONCLUSIONS: It was concluded that CAF did not influence the physiological and perceptual strain during a forced march but CAF was effective in improving performance during the early phase of a self-paced sandbag piling task.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.543

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.356 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicine & Science in Sports & ExerciseSame topicOccupational Health and PerformanceFrench-language works237,207