Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25336107›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of biometeorology2015

Thermal performance trials on the habitability of private bushfire shelters: part 1.

Nigel A S Taylor, Benjamin J Haberley, David J R Hoyle

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of biometeorology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Nigel A S TaylorCentre for Human and Applied Physiology, School of Medicine, University of Wollongong, Northfields Avenue, Wollongong, NSW 2522, Australia, nigel_taylor@uow.edu.au.
Benjamin J Haberley
David J R Hoyle

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This communication is the first of two in which specifications for private bushfire shelters were evaluated during human trials. The purpose of this investigation (series 1) was to test the hypothesis that shelters capable of maintaining the internal environment at, or below, a modified discomfort index of 39 °C would prevent a deep-body temperature elevation of >2 °C. This was tested over 96 trials during which eight men and eight women were exposed at rest (60 min) to three regulated shelter conditions satisfying that standard: 40 °C and 70 % relative humidity, 45 °C and 50 % relative humidity and 50 °C and 30 % relative humidity. Subjects were tested twice in each condition following exercise- and heat-induced dehydration (2 % body mass reduction) and pre-heating to each of two deep-body thermal states (37.5 and 38.5 °C). Participants presented well rested and euhydrated, and pre-treatments successfully achieved the thermal and hydration targets prior to exposure. Auditory canal temperatures declined as exposures commenced, with subsequent rises of >0.5 °C not evident within any trial. However, each increment in air temperature elicited a significant elevation in the respective within-trial mean auditory canal temperature (37.4, 37.7 and 37.9 °C) and heart rate (103, 116 and 122 beats.min(-1)) when subjects were moderately hyperthermic (all P < 0.05). Nevertheless, on average, subjects successfully defended deep-body temperature at levels significantly below those associated with heat illness, and it was concluded that this thermal specification for bushfire shelters appeared adequate, providing the physical characteristics of the internal air remained stable.

Indexed as

Body TemperatureEmergency ShelterFiresAdultAustraliaDehydrationFemaleHeart RateHumansHumidityMaleTemperatureYoung Adult

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.