Canadian Association of Neuroscience Review: Respiratory Control and Behavior in Humans: Lessons from Imaging and Experiments of Nature
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this review is to demonstrate that respiration is a complex behavior comprising both brainstem autonomic control and supramedullary influences, including volition. Whereas some fundamental mechanisms had to be established using animal models, this review focuses on clinical cases and physiological studies in humans to illustrate normal and abnormal respiratory behavior. To summarize, central respiratory drive is generated in the rostroventrolateral medulla, and transmitted to both the upper airway and to the main and accessory respiratory muscles. Afferent feedback is provided from lung and muscle mechnoreceptors, peripheral carotid and aortic chemoreceptors, and multiple central chemoreceptors. Supramedullary regions, including cortex and subcortex, modulate or initiate breathing with volition, emotion and at the onset of exercise. Autonomic breathing control can be perturbed by brainstem pathology including space occupying lesions, compression, congenital central hypoventilation syndrome and sudden infant death syndrome. Sleep-wake states are important in regulating breathing. Thus, respiratory control abnormalities are most often evident during sleep, or during transition from sleep to wakefulness. Previously undiagnosed structural brainstem pathology may be revealed by abnormal breathing during sleep. Ondine's curse and 'the locked-in syndrome' serve to distinguish brainstem from supramedullary regulatory mechanisms in humans: The former comprises loss of autonomic respiratory control and requires volitional breathing for survival, and the latter entails loss of corticospinal or corticobulbar tracts required for volitional breathing, but preserves autonomic respiratory control.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.032 | 0.020 |
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".