MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Cyclooxygenase inhibition does not alter methacholine-induced sweating

2014· article· en· W1979901993 on OpenAlexafffund
Naoto Fujii, Ryan McGinn, Gabrielle Paull, Jill M. Stapleton, Robert D. Meade, Glen P. Kenny

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Physiology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicOlfactory and Sensory Function Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersUniversity of Ottawa
KeywordsMethacholineMicrodialysisKetorolacMedicineCholinergicSWEATForearmAnesthesiaVasodilationPerfusionCyclooxygenaseInternal medicineEndocrinologyChemistryLungSurgeryRespiratory disease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cholinergic agents (e.g., methacholine) induce cutaneous vasodilation and sweating. Reports indicate that either nitric oxide (NO), cyclooxygenase (COX), or both can contribute to cholinergic cutaneous vasodilation. Also, NO is reportedly involved in cholinergic sweating; however, whether COX contributes to cholinergic sweating is unclear. Forearm sweat rate (ventilated capsule) and cutaneous vascular conductance (CVC, laser-Doppler perfusion units/mean arterial pressure) were evaluated in 10 healthy young (24 ± 4 yr) adults (7 men, 3 women) at four skin sites that were continuously perfused via intradermal microdialysis with 1) lactated Ringer (control), 2) 10 mM ketorolac (a nonselective COX inhibitor), 3) 10 mM N(G)-nitro-l-arginine methyl ester (l-NAME, a nonselective NO synthase inhibitor), or 4) a combination of 10 mM ketorolac + 10 mM l-NAME. At the four skin sites, methacholine was simultaneously infused in a dose-dependent manner (1, 10, 100, 1,000, 2,000 mM). Relative to the control site, forearm CVC was not influenced by ketorolac throughout the protocol (all P > 0.05), whereas l-NAME and ketorolac + l-NAME reduced forearm CVC at and above 10 mM methacholine (all P < 0.05). Conversely, there was no main effect of treatment site (P = 0.488) and no interaction of methacholine dose and treatment site (P = 0.711) on forearm sweating. Thus forearm sweating (in mg·min(-1)·cm(-2)) from baseline up to the maximal dose of methacholine was not different between the four sites (at 2,000 mM, control 0.50 ± 0.23, ketorolac 0.44 ± 0.23, l-NAME 0.51 ± 0.22, and ketorolac + l-NAME 0.51 ± 0.23). We show that both NO synthase and COX inhibition do not influence cholinergic sweating induced by 1-2,000 mM methacholine.

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 categoriesnone
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.369

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.078
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.203 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations47
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied PhysiologySame topicOlfactory and Sensory Function StudiesFrench-language works237,207