Sympathetic Responses to Valsalva's Manoeuvre Following Bed Rest
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to examine whether 14 days of head-down tilt bed rest (HDBR) alters autonomic regulation during Valsalva's manoeuvre (VM) and if this would predict blood pressure control during a 60 degrees head-up tilt (HUT) test. To examine autonomic control of blood pressure, we measured the changes in systolic (delta SBP) and diastolic (delta DBP) blood pressure between baseline and the early straining (Phase IIE) period of VM (20 sec straining to 40 mmHg; N = 7) in conjunction with changes in muscle sympathetic nerve activity (MSNA; microneurography) burst frequency (B/min) and total activity (% delta) from baseline over the 20-sec straining period. MSNA data were successfully recorded from 6 of the 7 individuals. The averaged responses from three repeated VMs performed in the supine position were compared between the pre- and post-HDBR tests. Compared with the pre-HDBR test, a greater reduction in SBP, DBP, and MAP was observed during Phase IIE following HDBR, p < 0.05. The increase in MSNA burst frequency during straining was augmented in the post- compared with the pre-HDBR test, p < 0.0001, as was the Phase IV blood pressure overshoot, p < 0.05. Although all subjects completed the 20-min pre-HDBR tilt test without evidence of hypotension or orthostatic intolerance, the post-HDBR test was stopped early in 5 of the 7 subjects due to systolic hypotension. The responses during the VM suggest that acute autonomic adjustments to rapid blood pressure changes are preserved after bed rest. Furthermore, MSNA and blood pressure responses during VM did not predict blood pressure control during orthostasis following HDBR.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".