Spinal cord injury and disruption of extrinsic sympathetic control of cerebral vasculature does not significantly alter cerebrovascular reactivity to carbon dioxide (1183.10)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The role of the autonomic nervous system in the control of the cerebral circulation has been widely debated. Individuals with spinal cord injury (SCI), who have damage to sympathetic pathways, provide a unique opportunity to study cerebrovascular control in the absence of extrinsic sympathetic control. Here we studied cerebrovascular reactivity to CO 2 in individuals with chronic SCI (both with and without damage to sympathetic pathways) and neurologically intact controls. A range of CO 2 levels was obtained by voluntary hyperventilation and hypoventilation, with increased inspired CO 2 , during normoxia (controlled on a breath‐by‐breath basis using dynamic end‐tidal forcing). Supine middle cerebral artery velocity (MCAv), inspired and expired O 2 and CO 2 were recorded continuously. Compared to controls, individuals with autonomically complete SCI had reduced supine end‐tidal CO 2 (36.6 ± 1.5 mmHg) and MCAv (53.4 ± 3.3 cm/s) compared to controls (40.5 ± 0.9 mmHg, p=0.05; 76.8 ± 6.0 cm/s, p<0.05). However, no significant difference in cerebrovascular reactivity to CO 2 were observed between groups: disruption of extrinsic sympathetic neural control of the cerebral vasculature in individuals with complete autonomic SCI did not significantly alter the sensitivity or operating point of cerebrovascular reactivity to CO 2 . Grant Funding Source : Supported by the Heart and Stroke Foundation of B.C. and Yukon (V.E.C.)
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".