MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Neuroretinal Function during Systemic Hyperoxia and Hypercapnia in Humans

2004· article· en· W2008309794 on OpenAlexaff
Hélène Kergoat, David Tinjust

Bibliographic record

VenueOptometry and Vision Science · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience of respiration and sleep
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCarbogenMedicineHyperoxiaAnesthesiaRespiratory rateHypercapniaHeart rateBlood pressurePerfusionOxygenationCardiologyInternal medicineAcidosisLung

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Breathing pure oxygen (O2) or carbogen is known to have differential effects on the retinal and choroidal blood flow. Our objective was to evaluate the effects these hemodynamic changes have on various retinal neurons receiving their vital nutrients from these two vascular beds. To that effect, we recorded the photopic flash electroretinogram (fERG) and oscillatory potentials (OP's) in man. METHODS: Eighteen adults participated in two test sessions to examine the effects of breathing pure O2 or carbogen on the fERG's and OP's. The retinal potentials were recorded at the end of each of the following breathing phases: (1) room air for 5 min, (2) pure O2 or carbogen for 5 min, (3) immediately after the flow of gas was stopped, and (4) 10 min after the flow of gas was stopped. The heart rate, respiratory rate, oxygen saturation (Sao2), and end-tidal carbon dioxide (Etco2) were monitored. The blood pressure and intraocular pressure were measured to derive the ocular perfusion pressure. RESULTS: Breathing pure O2 increased Sao2, decreased heart rate and Etco2, but did not alter respiratory rate and ocular perfusion pressure. Breathing carbogen increased Sao2, Etco2, and ocular perfusion pressure, decreased respiratory rate but did not alter heart rate. The fERG's and OP's were not detrimentally affected by breathing either pure oxygen or carbogen. Only OP4 was delayed at the end of testing in the O2 session. CONCLUSION: Our results show that the neural generators of the photopic fERG's and OP's in man are largely unaltered by the degree of systemic hyperoxia and hypercapnia induced and their reported effects on retinal and choroidal hemodynamics. These results, combined with earlier studies showing that some components of the scotopic fERG's and OP's were altered during similar testing conditions, suggest that the photopic system is more resistant than the scotopic system to altered ocular hemodynamics.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.671
Threshold uncertainty score0.515

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.342 · 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

Citations11
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOptometry and Vision ScienceSame topicNeuroscience of respiration and sleepFrench-language works237,207