MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Physiological responses of adults with coronary artery disease during extreme heat exposure

2023· article· en· W4378649183 on OpenAlexaff
Audrey‐Ann Bartlett

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysiology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicThermoregulation and physiological responses
Canadian institutionsMontreal Heart Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoronary artery diseaseMedicineCore temperatureRelative humidityInternal medicineCardiologyDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Extreme heat is becoming more frequent due to climate change. Different regions experience different forms of heat, such humid or dry heat, a greater risk of morbidity and mortality becomes apparent with higher temperatures. Adults with heart disease are especially vulnerable to the health risks of extreme heat. One possible reason for this greater risk is that adults with heart disease might experience greater physiological heat strain during extreme heat exposure. The objective of this study was to determine if adults with coronary artery disease (CAD) experience greater physiological strain relative to adults without CAD during hot/humid and very hot/dry heat exposures.Methods: 28 adults with stable CAD (2 females/26 males, 66±7 y, 1.96±0.17 m 2 ) and 26 adults without CAD (non-CAD; 13 females/12 males, 69±4 y, 1.86±0.21 m 2 ) rested for 3 hours in hot/humid (HH; 38°C/60% relative humidity; n= 22 CAD and 26 non-CAD) and very hot/dry (VHD; 45°C/15% relative humidity; n=24 CAD and 13 non-CAD) environments on separate days. Participants consumed 3 mL/kg/h of water during each exposure. Core (rectal) and skin temperatures, heart rate, and whole-body sweat loss were measured. Results: During exposure to HH, adults with CAD experienced a greater increase in core (0.58±0.28°C vs. 0.37±0.23°C, p=0.009) and mean skin (5.08±1.11°C vs. 4.06±0.76°C, p=0.0005) temperatures and sweat more (832±252 g vs. 471±244 g, p<0.0001). The increase in heart rate (CAD: 9±7 bpm vs. non-CAD: 9±6 bpm, p=0.914) and percent change in body weight (CAD: +0.12±0.32% vs. non-CAD: +0.25±0.22%, p=0.106) did not differ between groups. During exposure to VHD, adults with CAD experienced a greater increase in mean skin temperature (5.79±1.06°C vs. 4.92±1.23°C, p=0.029), greater sweat loss (1239±171 g vs. 794±159 g, p<0.0001), and greater percent change in body weight (-0.41±0.29% vs. -0.11±0.16%, p=0.001). The change in core temperature (CAD: 0.62±0.37°C vs. healthy: 0.48±0.21°C, p=0.092) and heart rate (CAD: 9±7 bpm vs. healthy: 13±6 bpm, p=0.196) did not differ between groups. Conclusion: During hot/humid heat exposure, adults with CAD experience greater thermal strain and fluid loss, whereas they experience greater fluid loss and dehydration during a very hot/dry heat exposure. The greater physiological heat strain experienced by adults with CAD may reflect the impact of altered cardiovascular function and/or medications on internal distribution and ultimately contribute to a greater risk of heat-related mortality. National Health and Medical Research Council This is the full abstract presented at the American Physiology Summit 2023 meeting and is only available in HTML format. There are no additional versions or additional content available for this abstract. Physiology was not involved in the peer review process.

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)0.000
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 score0.986
Threshold uncertainty score0.508

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.234 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysiologySame topicThermoregulation and physiological responsesFrench-language works237,207