The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A modified SCBA facepiece for accurate metabolic data collection from firefighters
Abstract
To better assess the energy expenditure and exertion of firefighters during simulated firefighting activities, a commercial firefighter self-contained breathing apparatus (SCBA) facepiece was modified to interface with a portable metabolic monitoring device (Cosmed K4b(2)) while still functioning as a positive pressure SCBA air supply. To validate the device, standard National Fire Protection Association 1981 SCBA function tests were conducted and 14 subjects performed variable-workload assessments using all combinations of two test devices (Cosmed K4b(2) and metabolic cart) and two masks (modified SCBA facepiece and stock manufacturer-supplied breath collection). Metabolic data collected with the Cosmed K4b(2) via the modified facepiece were found to be accurate when compared to a ParvoMedics Truemax 2400 metabolic cart (average per cent difference: 4.6%). This modified facepiece design is suitable for use in metabolic studies requiring the utilisation of an SCBA system. Furthermore, the well-established overestimation of oxygen consumption from the Cosmed K4b(2) system was replicated.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Accuracy metrics for individuals could misrepresent equation predictive accuracy because the measurement variability of the portable calorimeter would be present to an unknown extent.
“Equally important, accuracy metrics for individuals could misrepresent equation predictive accuracy because the measurement variability of the portable calorimeter (22–28, Fig. 3) would be present to an unknown extent.”
From Real-world walking economy: can laboratory equations predict field energy expenditure? (2021) · cites this paper as [24]
The calorimeter model in question consistently exceeds well-validated laboratory systems under similar conditions by magnitudes ranging from 2% to 25%.
“The calorimeter model in question consistently exceeds well-validated laboratory systems under similar conditions by magnitudes ranging from 2% to 25% (22–28).”
From Real-world walking economy: can laboratory equations predict field energy expenditure? (2021) · cites this paper as [24]
The Douglas bag, mass spectrometer, and other laboratory-based metabolic system assessments of the validity of the Cosmed K4b2 unit reported positive, but consistent within-study bias ranging from 2% to 25% across the relevant measurement range.
“The Douglas bag, mass spectrometer, and other laboratory-based metabolic system assessments of the validity of the Cosmed K4b2 unit (22–28) we used reported positive, but consistent within-study bias ranging from 2% to 25% across the relevant measurement range.”
From Real-world walking economy: can laboratory equations predict field energy expenditure? (2021) · cites this paper as [24]
Citations
Cites
STATISTICAL METHODS FOR ASSESSING AGREEMENT BETWEEN TWO METHODS OF CLINICAL MEASUREMENT
Martin Bland, J., & Altman, D. (1986) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(86)90837-8 · Cited by 47,965
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 30
- Approval of Respiratory Protective Devices, Subpart H: Self-Contained Breathing Apparatus, 2010, 42 CFR 84.91 – Breathing Resistance Test; Exhalation
- 10.1080/02701367.1985.10608441 · DOI
- 10.1007/s00421-001-0572-2 · DOI
- Consolazio, C. F., Robert E.Johnson, and E.Marek. 1951. Metabolic Methods: Clinical Procedures in the Study of Metabolic Functions. St. Louis, MO: Henry Kimpton. · DOI
- 10.1519/JSC.0b013e3181bb72c0 · DOI
- 10.1080/00140130600667451 · DOI
- 10.1139/H07-020 · DOI
- 10.1016/S1440-2440(04)80039-2 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1080/00140137908924636 · DOI
- Eisenmann J. C., 2003, Journal of Sports Medicine Physical Fitness, 43, 150
- 10.1080/00140130802120259 · DOI
- 10.1080/00140130210159986 · DOI
- 10.1007/s00421-008-0673-2 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.apergo.2006.01.004 · DOI
- Holmer I., 2006, International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics, 12, 297, 10.1080/10803548.2006.11076689 · DOI
- 10.1016/S0003-6870(01)00007-2 · DOI
- 10.1007/s00421-009-1092-8 · DOI
- 10.1034/j.1600-0838.2003.00319.x · DOI
- 10.1016/0169-8141(94)90080-9 · DOI
- 10.1055/s-2001-13816 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1080/00140139.2010.489962 · DOI
- 10.1016/S1440-2440(01)80041-4 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1080/00140139.2012.703696 · DOI
- 10.1080/00140139508925251 · DOI
- 10.1097/00043764-199208000-00014 · DOI
- 10.1207/s15327043hup0304_1 · DOI
- Stuart M. K., 1981, Journal of Applied Physiology, 50, 444, 10.1152/jappl.1981.50.2.444 · DOI
- Thomas S., 1992, Canadian Journal of Sport Sciences, 17, 338
- 10.1007/BF00690906 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.apergo.2009.07.009 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Real-world walking economy: can laboratory equations predict field energy expenditure?
Weyand, P. G., Ludlow, L. W., Nollkamper, J. J., & Buller, M. J. (2021) · Journal of Applied Physiology · doi:10.1152/japplphysiol.00121.2021 · Cited by 6
Metadata
- Authors
- Kesler, R. M., Hsiao-Wecksler, E. T., Motl, R. W., Klaren, R. E., Ensari, I., & Horn, G. P.
- Venue
- Ergonomics
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2014-10-17
- Volume
- 58
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 148-159
- ISSN
- 0014-0139
- 1366-5847
- Cited by
- 7
- References
- 1
- Language
- en
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
