MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Gender Differences in Hemodynamic Responses to Endothelin-1

2000· article· en· W1966508248 on OpenAlexaff
Rabelais Tatchum‐Talom, Céline Martel, Claude Labrie, Fernand Labrie, André Marette

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cardiovascular Pharmacology · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNitric Oxide and Endothelin Effects
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVasodilationBlood pressureHemodynamicsMedicineVasoconstrictionInternal medicineVascular resistanceEndothelin receptorEndothelin 1Endocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We investigated whether gender affects the pressor and constrictor effects of endothelin-1 (ET-1) in anesthetized rats. Baseline values for arterial blood pressure (mmHg) and hindquarter resistance (HQR, mmHg/ml/min/100 g), respectively, were similar in male (96.0 +/- 3.1 and 13.9 +/- 0.6) and female (103.1 +/- 5.6 and 12.8 +/- 2.3) rats. ET-1 (1 and 3 microg/kg) produced rapid and transient falls in arterial blood pressure and HQR, followed by long-lasting increases in blood pressure and HQR. The initial ET-1-induced hypotension and vasodilation were similar in both groups. However, the pressor and hindquarter vasoconstrictor effects were significantly higher (p < 0.05) in male than female rats. Thus, the increases in blood pressure and HQR to ET-1 (3 microg/kg) were attenuated in female (+15.3 +/- 3.4 mmHg and +3.7 +/- 1.6 mmHg/ml/min/100 g) compared to male (+24.9 +/- 2.3 mmHg and +8.0 +/- 1.6 mmHg/ml/ min/100 g) rats. These results indicate that there is a gender difference in the vasoconstrictor, but not the vasodilator effects of ET-1. We suggest that the lower ET-1-induced hypertension and hindlimb vasoconstrictions observed in female rats may be responsible for the lower risk of developing coronary heart disease in premenopausal women.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.516
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.276 · 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.

Study designOther design
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

Citations15
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cardiovascular PharmacologySame topicNitric Oxide and Endothelin EffectsFrench-language works237,207