MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Function of human intrinsic cardiac neurons in situ

2001· article· en· W1881997450 on OpenAlexaff
Rakesh C. Arora, Gregory Matthew Hirsch, Kristine Hirsch, Camille Hancock Friesen, J. Andrew Armour

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Physiology-Regulatory, Integrative and Comparative Physiology · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Ischemia and Reperfusion
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCardiopulmonary bypassCardiologyMedicineInternal medicineCardiac cycleArteryCardiac function curveBlood pressureAnesthesiaHemodynamicsCardiac surgeryPremovement neuronal activityNeuroscienceHeart failurePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We sought to determine the behavior of intrinsic cardiac neurons in human subjects undergoing cardiac surgery and to correlate their activity with hemodynamics status. A lead II electrocardiogram, pulmonary artery pressure, and systemic arterial pressure were recorded along with extracellular activity generated by right atrial neurons in 10 patients undergoing coronary artery bypass surgery. Identified neurons generated spontaneously activity that was, for the most part, unrelated to the cardiac cycle. Most neurons were activated by gentle mechanical distortion of ventricular epicardial loci. The activity generated by neurons in each patient increased when arterial pressure increased and decreased when arterial pressure fell. Intrinsic cardiac neurons continued to generate activity during cardioplegia and cardiopulmonary bypass, but at reduced levels. Normal neuronal activity was restored postbypass. It is concluded that human intrinsic cardiac neurons generate spontaneous activity and that many receive inputs from ventricular mechanosensory neurites. The latter may account for the fact that their behavior depends, in part, on cardiac dynamics. They are also sensitive to intravenously administered pharmacological agents. These data also indicate that cardiopulmonary bypass and cardioplegia do not induce residual depression of their function.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.831
Threshold uncertainty score0.864

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.272 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations13
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Physiology-Regulatory, Integrative and Comparative PhysiologySame topicCardiac Ischemia and ReperfusionFrench-language works237,207