English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Purpose: Field measurement of core temperature typically requires rectal or other invasive, expensive core temperature methods. Infrared (IR) thermography uses a handheld camera to measure surface temperature at discrete locations. We attempted to validate IR thermography against coretemperature capsules for the tracking of core-temperature changes at rest, during exercise, and recovery. Hypothesis: Infrared thermography is a noninvasive method to follow changes in core temperature during exercise. Materials and methods: Twelve athletes swallowed an ingestible core-temperature (CorTemp) capsule 1-hour prior to exercise. Athletes refrained from drinking for 2 hours prior to or during the study. Temperatures were obtained using both the CorTemp capsule and IR thermography at 10-minute intervals for 30 minutes before exercise, during 30 minutes of moderate intensity aerobic exercise, and for 30 minutes of recovery. The temperatures were then averaged for each segment of data collection. Study design: Prospective descriptive study. Results: Infrared thermography results (rest = 34.7°C C 0.49, exercise = 34.1°C ± 0.77, recovery = 34.6°C ± 0.46) were significantly lower than with the CorTemp capsules (rest = 37°C ± 0.55, exercise = 38.6°C ± 0.47, recovery = 37.7°C ± 0.47) throughout the data collection period. There were no significant correlations between the two measurement methods (rest = 0.22, exercise = 0.07, recovery = 0.59; all p > 0.05). Conclusion: Infrared thermography is not a valid method to track core-temperature changes during exercise. In addition to IR thermography readings being consistently lower, temperature changes before, during, and after exercise showed wide and inconsistent variability.

Infrared Thermography: Not a Valid Method to Track Changes in Core Temperature in Exercising Athletes