MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Assessment Of The OmiusTMCooling Headband On 5-km Running Performance In The Heat

2024· article· en· W4402663592 on OpenAlexaff
Antoine Jolicoeur Desroches, Fedi Aloui, Thomas A. Deshayes, Éric Goulet

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFuel Cells and Related Materials
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Exercise performed under hot/humid conditions can hinder endurance performance. The use of cooling strategies under these conditions can be advantageous. The OmiusTM headband is purported to reduce the perception of heat and improve performance. It is used by athletes but has not received scientific attention. PURPOSE: Examine the impact of the OmiusTM headband on selected thermal and cardiovascular functions and subjective perceptions and running performance. METHODS: Using a randomized crossover protocol, 10 trained male athletes (28 ± 4 yrs) completed two trials (COOL: OmiusTMheadband, CON: sham headband, 35.0 ± 0.3 °C, 56 ± 3% relative humidity, wind: 13.4 ± 2.0 km/h) comprising a preload period of 70 min of running at 60% VO2max followed by a 5-km running time-trial (TT). In both trials, the headband was sprayed with 6 mL of 20 °C water every 10 min. Participants consumed 500 mL/70 kg body mass/h of water (20 °C) during the preload exercise. RESULTS: Participants started the trials similarly hydrated, as indicated by the non-significant differences in capillary blood osmolality prior to the COOL and CON trials. Body mass loss at the end of the TT was not significantly different between COOL (3.7 ± 0.4%) and CON (3.6 ± 0.2%). Heart rate, aural canal temperature and perceived exertion and whole-body thermal comfort did not significantly differ between COOL and CON during the preload and TT periods. Rectal temperature was significantly lower with CON (− 0.18 ± 0.17 °C) than COOL prior to the preload period; this significant difference persisted during the preload period. Rectal temperature did not differ significantly between conditions during the TT. Forehead temperature was significantly lower with COOL than CON during the preload, but no significant difference was observed at the end of the TT. Perceived forehead thermal comfort was only significantly lower with COOL than CON during the preload period. TT time did not significantly differ between COOL (19.8 ± 1.2 min) and CON (20.2 ± 1.0 min). CONCLUSIONS: In hot/humid conditions, the OmiusTM headband does not improve heart rate, forehead, rectal and aural canal temperatures, perceived exertion, whole-body and forehead thermal comfort and performance during a 5 km running TT preceded by 70 min of moderate-intensity running.

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)0.001
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.249 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise→Same topicFuel Cells and Related Materials→French-language works237,207→