Aminophylline increases ventilation and crural diaphragm contractility in awake canines
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aminophylline (Amino) is still used in treatment of COPD. However, effects of Amino on ventilation and respiratory muscles are uncertain. Previously, we examined the effects of Amino on costal diaphragm (Resp Phys, 2009 167:273-80). Since costal and crural diaphragm show differential function, structure and fiber type, we studied the effect of Amino on the crural diaphragm (CRU), by measurement of both length and moving average EMG. Sonomicrometry transducers and EMG electrodes were implanted in the left CRU. After recovery, the animals were studied awake, breathing through a mask recording airflow, ETCO 2 , heart rate, muscle length, and EMG during room air, and CO 2 stimulation, before and after Amino. Results are shown at room air and 2 levels of CO 2 . For N=6 dogs (mean wt 29.8kg) studied after 25 days, minute ventilation, tidal volume, and respiratory frequency increased significantly with Amino, during resting breathing and all levels of CO 2 . Mean Amino was 72 umol/L (therapeutic range 55-110 umol/L). CRU shortening increased significantly with Amino while CRU EMG activity remained unchanged, consistent with increased contractility of the CRU with Amino. We conclude that, at clinical therapeutic doses of Aminophylline, crural diaphragm contractility is increased.
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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".