MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1980939587 · doi:10.1038/jcbfm.2014.229

Evaluation of Cerebrovascular Impedance and Wave Reflection in Mouse by Ultrasound

2014· article· en· W1980939587 on OpenAlexafffund
Christopher K. Macgowan, Sarah Joy Stoops, Yuqing Zhou, Lindsay S. Cahill, John G. Sled

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cerebral Blood Flow & Metabolism · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Health and Disease Prevention
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsReflection (computer programming)UltrasoundMedicineRadiologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Genetic and surgical mouse models are commonly used to study cerebrovascular disease, but their size makes invasive hemodynamic testing technically challenging. The purpose of this study was to demonstrate a noninvasive measurement of cerebrovascular impedance and wave reflection in mice using high-frequency ultrasound in the left common carotid artery (LCCA), and to examine whether microvascular changes associated with hypercapnia could be detected with such an approach. Ten mice (C57BL/6J) were studied using a high-frequency ultrasound system (40 MHz). Lumen area and blood flow waveforms were obtained from the LCCA and used to calculate pulse-wave velocity, input impedance, and reflection amplitude and transit time under both normocapnic and hypercapnic (5% CO2) ventilation. With hypercapnia, vascular resistance was observed to decrease by 87%±12%. Although the modulus of input impedance was unchanged with hypercapnia, a phase decrease indicative of increased total arterial compliance was observed at low harmonics together with an increased reflection coefficient in both the time (0.57±0.08 versus 0.68±0.08, P=0.04) and frequency domains (0.62±0.08 versus 0.73±0.06, P=0.02). Interestingly, the majority of LCCA blood flow was found to pass into the internal carotid artery (range=76% to 90%, N=3), suggesting that hemodynamic measurements in this vessel are a good metric for intracerebral reactivity in mouse.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations18
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cerebral Blood Flow & MetabolismSame topicCardiovascular Health and Disease PreventionFrench-language works237,207