MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1573422768 · doi:10.1080/02640414.2015.1078488

Responses of the human spleen to exercise

2015· review· en· W1573422768 on OpenAlexaff
Roy J. Shephard

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Sports Sciences · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicExercise and Physiological Responses
Canadian institutionsYork UniversityUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpleenContraction (grammar)Blood volumePlasma volumeMedicineInternal medicineEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The human spleen shows a decrease in volume of around 40% early during vigorous exercise and in response to other stressful stimuli such as maximal apnoea and the breathing of hypoxic gas mixtures. Contraction seems an active response, mediated by alpha-adrenergic fibres in the splenic nerve. Given the relatively small size of the human spleen, the effect upon physical performance is likely to be small; the augmentation of total blood volume is <2%, and even taking account of other causes of haemoconcentration during vigorous exercise, the increase of haematocrit is <10%. However, one of two studies suggested that the haemoconcentration may be sufficient to cause errors in the traditional method for calculating exercise-induced changes of plasma volume. The spleen also contributes leucocytes and platelets to the general circulation as part of the "fight or flight" reaction to stressors. The mobilisation of leucocytes proceeds more slowly than that of the red cells; it depends not only upon an active contraction of the spleen, but also a modulation of leucocyte adhesion molecules. Splenectomy impairs exercise performance in horses, but human performance data are lacking; overall health effects seem minimal, and many patients live many years after removal of their spleens.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.163
GPT teacher head0.443
Teacher spread0.280 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations67
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Sports SciencesSame topicExercise and Physiological ResponsesFrench-language works237,207