Mechanisms of active laryngeal closure during noninvasive intermittent positive pressure ventilation in nonsedated lambs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present study stems from our recent demonstration (Moreau-Bussiere F, Samson N, St-Hilaire M, Reix P, Lafond JR, Nsegbe E, Praud JP. J Appl Physiol 102: 2149-2157, 2007) that a progressive increase in nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation (nIPPV) leads to active glottal closure in nonsedated, newborn lambs. The aim of the study was to determine whether the mechanisms involved in this glottal narrowing during nIPPV originate from upper airway receptors and/or from bronchopulmonary receptors. Two groups of newborn lambs were chronically instrumented for polysomnographic recording: the first group of five lambs underwent a two-step bilateral thoracic vagotomy using video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (bilateral vagotomy group), while the second group, composed of six lambs, underwent chronic laryngotracheal separation (isolated upper airway group). A few days later, polysomnographic recordings were performed to assess glottal muscle electromyography during step increases in nIPPV (volume control mode). Results show that active glottal narrowing does not develop when nIPPV is applied on the upper airways only, and that this narrowing is prevented by bilateral vagotomy when nIPPV is applied on intact airways. In conclusion, active glottal narrowing in response to increasing nIPPV originates from bronchopulmonary receptors.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".