MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Effects Of Hydration Protocols On Physiological Responses Of Barbados Firefighters During A Training Simulation

2022· article· en· W4294798351 on OpenAlexaff
F. Michael Williams-Bell, David A. Zahrabelny, Fernando Suarez Muniz, David B. Copithorne

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicThermoregulation and physiological responses
Canadian institutionsDurham College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFirefightingDehydrationCore temperatureTraining (meteorology)StressorMedicineUrine specific gravityUrineAnimal scienceChemistryAnesthesiaInternal medicineBiologyMeteorologyPhysicsBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Firefighting is a physically and psychologically demanding occupation with firefighters exposed to various environmental stressors. Many studies have examined the impact of firefighting activities on dehydration, but pre-training hydration protocols have not been extensively investigated. PURPOSE: To quantify the hydration status of Barbados Fire Services firefighters prior to a simulated training scenario and determine the impact of two hydration protocols on cardiovascular and thermoregulatory responses. METHOS: Seven career firefighters from the Barbados Fire Services completed a simulated firefighting scenario on two separate days preceded by two different hydration protocols. Participants consumed: HYD 1) 10 mL/kg of water as one bolus 2-hours prior to the scenario, and HYD 2) 10 mL/kg separated into 3-equal volumes every 45-minutes starting 2-hours prior to the scenario, counter-balanced on separate days. Dependent measures included body mass, urine specific gravity, heart rate, and core temperature. RESULTS: Seven (100%) and six (86%) participants were in a hypo-hydrated state prior to the experimental protocol for HYD 1 and HYD 2, respectively. Body mass revealed a 0.1% reduction for HYD 1 and a 0.1% increase for HYD 2 (p > 0.05). Pre-hydration urine specific gravity (USG) was significantly greater than post-hydration USG for HYD 1 (1.029 ± 0.006 and 1.019 ± 0.009) and HYD 2 (1.027 ± 0.005 and 1.016 ± 0.011), respectively (p < 0.05). Change in core temperature was not different between HYD 1 and HYD 2 immediately following the firefighting simulation (0.41 ± 0.24 vs 0.50 ± 0.22 °C), 5-minutes into recovery (0.69 ± 0.37 vs 0.80 ± 0.29 °C), and 8-minutes into recovery (0.76 ± 0.36 vs 0.89 ± 0.26 °C), respectively (p > 0.05). Peak heart rate during the firefighting simulation was not different between HYD 1 (188 ± 4 bpm) and HYD 2 (183 ± 7 bpm) (p> 0.05). CONCLUSION: The hydration protocols examined in this study did not differ on cardiovascular or thermoregulatory responses. However, both protocols improved urine specific gravity following a firefighting training simulation indicating that when firefighters arrive in a hypo-hydrated state, commencing fluid intake 2-hours before training may improve post-simulation hydration status.

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)0.001
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.304 · 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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicine & Science in Sports & ExerciseSame topicThermoregulation and physiological responsesFrench-language works237,207