Extremely low frequency pulsed electromagnetic field designed for antinociception does not affect microvascular responsiveness to the vasodilator acetylcholine
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A 225 microT, extremely low frequency, pulsed electromagnetic field (PEMF) that was designed for the induction of antinociception, was tested for its effectiveness to influence blood flow within the skeletal microvasculature of a male Sprague-Dawley rat model (n = 103). Acetylcholine (0.1, 1.0, or 10 mM) was used to perturb normal blood flow and to delineate differential effects of the PEMF, based on degree of vessel dilation. After both 30 and 60 min of PEMF exposure, we report no effects on peak perfusion response to acetylcholine (with only 0.2% of the group difference attributed to exposure). Spectral analysis of blood flow data was generated to obtain information related to myogenic activity (0.15-0.40 Hz), respiratory rate (0.4-2.0 Hz), and heart rate (2.0-7.0 Hz), including the peak frequency within each of the three frequency regions identified above, peak power, full width at half maximum (FWHM), and mean within band. No significant effects due to exposure were observed on myogenic activity of examined blood vessels, or on heart rate parameters. Anesthesia-induced respiratory depression was, however, significantly reduced following PEMF exposure compared to shams (although exposure only accounted for 9.4% of the group difference). This set of data suggest that there are no significant acute physiological effects of 225 microT PEMF after 30 and 60 min of exposure on peak blood flow, heart rate, and myogenic activity, but perhaps a small attenuation effect on anesthetic-induced respiratory depression.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".