Acute mountain sickness, chemosensitivity, and cardiorespiratory responses in humans exposed to hypobaric and normobaric hypoxia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We examined the control of breathing, cardiorespiratory effects, and the incidence of acute mountain sickness (AMS) in humans exposed to hypobaric hypoxia (HH) and normobaric hypoxia (NH), and under two control conditions [hypobaric normoxia (HN) and normobaric normoxia (NN)]. Exposures were 6 h in duration, and separated by 2 wk between hypoxic exposures and 1 wk between normoxic exposures. Before and after exposures, subjects (n = 11) underwent hyperoxic and hypoxic Duffin CO2 rebreathing tests and a hypoxic ventilatory response test (HVR). Inside the environmental chamber, minute ventilation (V(E)), tidal volume (V(T)), frequency of breathing (fB), blood oxygenation, heart rate, and blood pressure were measured at 5 and 30 min and hourly until exit. Symptoms of AMS were evaluated using the Lake Louise score (LLS). Both the hyperoxic and hypoxic CO2 thresholds were lower after HH and NH, whereas CO2 sensitivity was increased after HH and NH in the hypoxic test and after NH in the hyperoxic test. Values for HVR were similar across the four exposures. No major differences were observed for Ve or any other cardiorespiratory variables between NH and HH. The LLS was greater in AMS-susceptible than in AMS-resistant subjects; however, LLS was alike between HH and NH. In AMS-susceptible subjects, fB correlated positively and Vt negatively with the LLS. We conclude that 6 h of hypoxic exposure is sufficient to lower the peripheral and central CO2 threshold but does not induce differences in cardiorespiratory variables or AMS incidence between HH and NH.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".