The effect of an acute increase in central blood volume on the response of cerebral blood flow to acute hypotension
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of the present study was to examine whether the response of cerebral blood flow to an acute change in perfusion pressure is modified by an acute increase in central blood volume. Nine young, healthy subjects voluntarily participated in this study. To measure dynamic cerebral autoregulation during normocapnic and hypercapnic (5%) conditions, the change in middle cerebral artery mean blood flow velocity was analyzed during acute hypotension caused by two methods: 1) thigh-cuff occlusion release (without change in central blood volume); and 2) during the recovery phase immediately following release of lower body negative pressure (LBNP; -50 mmHg) that initiated an acute increase in central blood volume. In the thigh-cuff occlusion release protocol, as expected, hypercapnia decreased the rate of regulation, as an index of dynamic cerebral autoregulation (0.236 ± 0.018 and 0.167 ± 0.025 s(-1), P = 0.024). Compared with the cuff-occlusion release, the acute increase in central blood volume (relative to the LBNP condition) with LBNP release attenuated dynamic cerebral autoregulation (P = 0.009). Therefore, the hypercapnia-induced attenuation of dynamic cerebral autoregulation was not observed in the LBNP release protocol (P = 0.574). These findings suggest that an acute change in systemic blood distribution modifies dynamic cerebral autoregulation during acute hypotension.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".