MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4310696642 · doi:10.1249/mss.0000000000003074

Effects of Face Masks on the Multiple Dimensions and Neurophysiological Mechanisms of Exertional Dyspnea

2022· article· en· W4310696642 on OpenAlexafffund
Olivia N. Ferguson, Reid Mitchell, Michele R. Schaeffer, Andrew H. Ramsook, Satvir S. Dhillon, Paolo B. Dominelli, Yannick Molgat‐Seon, Jordan A. Guenette

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfection Control and Ventilation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WinnipegUniversity of WaterlooUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicinePhysical therapyCrossover studyDiaphragmatic breathingHeart ratePhysical medicine and rehabilitationRespiratory rateCardiologyInternal medicineBlood pressure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: During the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, public health officials widely adopted the use of face masks (FM) to minimize infections. Despite consistent evidence that FMs increase dyspnea, no studies have examined the multidimensional components of dyspnea or their underlying physiological mechanisms. METHODS: In a randomized crossover design, 16 healthy individuals ( n = 9 women, 25 ± 3 yr) completed incremental cycling tests over three visits, where visits 2 and 3 were randomized to either surgical FM or no mask control. Dyspnea intensity and unpleasantness were assessed throughout exercise (0-10 Borg scale), and the Multidimensional Dyspnea Profile was administered immediately after exercise. Crural diaphragmatic EMG and esophageal pressure were measured using a catheter to estimate neural respiratory drive and respiratory muscle effort, respectively. RESULTS: Dyspnea unpleasantness was significantly greater with the FM at the highest equivalent submaximal work rate achieved by a given participant in both conditions (iso-work; 5.9 ± 1.7 vs 3.9 ± 2.9 Borg 0-10 units, P = 0.007) and at peak exercise (7.8 ± 2.1 vs 5.9 ± 3.4 Borg 0-10 units, P = 0.01) with no differences in dyspnea intensity ratings throughout exercise compared with control. There were significant increases in the sensory quality of "smothering/air hunger" ( P = 0.01) and the emotional response of "anxiousness" ( P = 0.04) in the FM condition. There were significant increases in diaphragmatic EMG and esophageal pressure at select submaximal work rates, but no differences in heart rate, pulse oximetry-derived arterial oxygen saturation, or breathing frequency throughout exercise with FMs compared with control. FMs significantly reduced peak work rate and exercise duration (both P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: FMs negatively impact the affective domain of dyspnea and increase neural respiratory drive and respiratory muscle effort during exercise, although the impact on other cardiorespiratory responses are minimal.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.710
Threshold uncertainty score0.250

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.241 · 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

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicine & Science in Sports & ExerciseSame topicInfection Control and VentilationFrench-language works237,207