MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1969726059 · doi:10.1152/ajpregu.00425.2014

End tidal-to-arterial CO<sub>2</sub>and O<sub>2</sub>gas gradients at low- and high-altitude during dynamic end-tidal forcing

2015· article· en· W1969726059 on OpenAlexafffund
Michael M. Tymko, Philip N. Ainslie, David B. MacLeod, Chris K. Willie, Glen E. Foster

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Physiology-Regulatory, Integrative and Comparative Physiology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicHigh Altitude and Hypoxia
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCanada Foundation for InnovationNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaGovernment of Canada
KeywordsHypercapniaPartial pressureEffects of high altitude on humansAltitude (triangle)Nuclear medicineChemistryCardiologyMedicineInternal medicineOxygenRespiratory systemAnatomyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We sought to characterize and quantify the performance of a portable dynamic end-tidal forcing (DEF) system in controlling the partial pressure of arterial CO2 (Pa(CO2)) and O2 (Pa(O2)) at low (LA; 344 m) and high altitude (HA; 5,050 m) during an isooxic CO2 test and an isocapnic O2 test, which is commonly used to measure ventilatory and vascular reactivity in humans (n = 9). The isooxic CO2 tests involved step changes in the partial pressure of end-tidal CO2 (PET(CO2)) of -10, -5, 0, +5, and +10 mmHg from baseline. The isocapnic O2 test consisted of a 10-min hypoxic step (PET(O2) = 47 mmHg) from baseline at LA and a 5-min euoxic step (PET(O2) = 100 mmHg) from baseline at HA. At both altitudes, PET(O2) and PET(CO2) were controlled within narrow limits (<1 mmHg from target) during each protocol. During the isooxic CO2 test at LA, PET(CO2) consistently overestimated Pa(CO2) (P < 0.01) at both baseline (2.1 ± 0.5 mmHg) and hypercapnia (+5 mmHg: 2.1 ± 0.7 mmHg; +10 mmHg: 1.9 ± 0.5 mmHg). This P(a)-PET(CO2) gradient was approximately twofold greater at HA (P < 0.05). At baseline at both altitudes, PET(O2) overestimated Pa(O2) by a similar extent (LA: 6.9 ± 2.1 mmHg; HA: 4.5 ± 0.9 mmHg; both P < 0.001). This overestimation persisted during isocapnic hypoxia at LA (6.9 ± 0.6 mmHg) and during isocapnic euoxia at HA (3.8 ± 1.2 mmHg). Step-wise multiple regression analysis, on the basis of the collected data, revealed that it may be possible to predict an individual's arterial blood gases during DEF. Future research is needed to validate these prediction algorithms and determine the implications of end-tidal-to-arterial gradients in the assessment of ventilatory and/or vascular reactivity.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.230
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 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

Citations79
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Physiology-Regulatory, Integrative and Comparative PhysiologySame topicHigh Altitude and HypoxiaFrench-language works237,207