Noninvasive Assessment of Inspiratory Muscle Function during Exercise
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The use of esophageal and gastric balloons limits measurement of the tension-time index of inspiratory muscles (TTI) during exercise. The aim of this study was to assess whether a noninvasive tension-time index, TT(0.1), given by P(0.1)/PI(max) x TI/Ttot (where P(0.1) is mouth occlusion pressure, PI(max) is maximal inspiratory pressure, and TI/Ttot is duty cycle) could reliably assess TTI during exercise. In seven healthy young men and nine patients with COPD we measured TT(0.1) and TTI (i.e., Pes/Pes(max) x TI/Ttot where Pes is mean esophageal pressure and Pes(max) is maximal static Pes) at rest and during an incremental exercise test. A significant linear correlation (p < 0.02) was found between TT(0.1) and TTI in all normal subjects and patients with COPD. An equation for estimating TTI from TT(0.1) was established for each group. In the normal subjects there was good agreement between estimated and observed data. In five additional normal males studied prospectively, the agreement was also satisfactory and reproducible. In the COPD patients the agreement was poor. In conclusion, in young healthy subjects the changes in TT(0.1) during exercise reflect the changes in TTI, allowing satisfactory estimation of TTI from noninvasive measurements of TT(0.1).
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 | 0.002 |
| 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".