Respiratory Center Output following Zopiclone or Diazepam Administration in Patients with Pulmonary Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mouth occlusion pressure at 0.1 s (P0.1) and minute ventilation (VE) were measured at rest and during progressive hypercapnia in 32 patients. Under double-blind conditions and according to a 2 x 2 Latin-square design, half the patients received one oral dose of diazepam and its placebo. Using the same design, the other half received zopiclone and its placebo. Normocapnic and moderately hypoxemic patients between the ages of 21 and 69 with moderate to severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease were included in the study. Diazepam produced a statistically significant decrease (p less than 0.05) over its placebo in delta P0.1/delta PETCO2 values following CO2 rebreathing. Zopiclone did not influence either delta P0.1/delta PETCO2 or delta VE/delta PETCO2, but produced a significant increase in respiratory frequency. However, no statistically significant differences were observed between the two active treatments.
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) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".