Carotid distensibility, baroreflex sensitivity, and orthostatic stress
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this study, we tested the hypothesis that carotid arteries undergo rapid changes in distensibility on moving from the supine to head-up tilt (HUT) postures and, subsequently, that this change in carotid distensibility (cDa) might be associated with concurrent reductions in cardiovagal baroreflex sensitivity (BRS). Thus the effect of posture on carotid vascular mechanics and cardiovagal BRS with consideration for altered central hemodynamics (i.e., stroke volume; Doppler ultrasound) was examined. Carotid pulse pressure (cPP; Millar transducer) and contralateral B-mode ultrasound images were assessed at the carotid artery during supine and 60 degrees HUT postures. From these measures, cDa was calculated at 5-mmHg pressure increments experienced during the cardiac cycle (n = 6). cPP (n = 9) was not different in the two postures. A smaller stroke volume being ejected into a smaller carotid artery in HUT explained the maintenance of cPP in HUT. Also, compared with supine, cDa was reset to a lower level in HUT (main effect of posture; P < 0.05). Cardiovagal BRS (sequence method) was diminished in HUT vs. supine (P < 0.05). A positive correlation was observed between the tilt-induced changes in maximal cDa (in early systole) and cardiovagal BRS (r2 = 0.75; P < 0.05), but there was little predictive relationship between changes in cPP, systolic vessel dimensions, or average cDa and the corresponding change in BRS. The present results indicate that HUT elicits rapid changes in carotid artery mechanics and further suggest that reductions in the maximal cDa measured in early systole contribute to reduced cardiovagal BRS with HUT.
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".