Physiological responses to heat stress in groundskeepers: an observational field study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The extent to which groundskeepers experience thermal and cardiovascular strain, dehydration, and accompanying declines in kidney function during work in hot-humid conditions is unknown. Demographics, thermal and cardiovascular strain, hydration, and kidney function were assessed in 20 groundskeepers (18 men; mean ± SD, age = 37.9 ± 8.4 years, body mass index = 31.5 ± 7.5 kg⋅m−2) during work on two summer days. Before (AM) and after (PM) the work shift, resting blood pressure (BP) and heart rate (HR) were measured and urine and blood samples were collected. During the work shift, fluid intake was recorded, gastrointestinal temperature ( TGI) was recorded, and HR was recorded continuously. In 45% of participants, AM BP > 130/80 mm Hg on Day 1 and Day 2. Peak HR and TGI achieved across both days were 143 ± 15 b·min−1 and 37.7 ± 0.3 °C, respectively, and average peak wet bulb globe temperature was 39.1 ± 3.5 °C. On both days, urine specific gravity ( USG = 1.021 ± 01) and urine color ( UCOL = 6 ± 1) did not change across the work shift (all P > 0.28), but most subjects began with concentrated urine (62.5% USG ≥ 1.020 and 95% UCOL ≥ 4). Total fluid intake = 2.3 ± 1.6 L during work and consisted of 70% water, 25% sugar-sweetened beverages, 5% other. For six subjects, the average estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) at AM was ≤ 60 mL·min−1·1.73 m−2. Five subjects had SCr increases from AM to PM ≥ 0.3 mg·dL−1, signifying an acute kidney injury (AKI). While hyperthermia was not prevalent, subjects began and ended the workday with concentrated urine. Hypertension, obesity, and low water intake may have contributed to the overall low kidney function and AKIs observed.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".