MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2068345161 · doi:10.1139/h05-018

Cold pressor test protocol to evaluate cardiac autonomic function

2006· article· en· W2068345161 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Jennifer L. Wirch, Larry A. Wolfe, Tracey L. Weissgerber, Gregory Davies

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Physiology Nutrition and Metabolism · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHeart Rate Variability and Autonomic Control
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersPhysicians' Services Incorporated FoundationFoundation for Cardiovascular Research
KeywordsCold pressor testBaroreflexMedicineHeart rate variabilityBlood pressureHeart rateAutonomic nervous systemAnesthesiaCardiologyOrthostatic vital signsCardiac function curveReflexInternal medicineHeart failure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The primary objective of this study was to develop a cold pressor test (CPT) protocol to evaluate cardiac autonomic function. Secondary objectives were to assess CPT protocol reliability and to examine gender differences in response to orthostatic stress and the CPT. Healthy, normotensive men and women (n = 12 per group) completed 2 trials on different days in the left lateral decubitus and standing postures and during a 6 min CPT (hand immersion while seated). Measurements included R-R interval, blood pressure, ventilatory responses, spontaneous baroreflex sensitivity, and heart rate variability indices. During the CPT, blood pressure and the sympathetic nervous system (SNS) indicator increased significantly and low-frequency power, high-frequency power (normalized for tidal volume), and the parasympathetic nervous system (PNS) indicator decreased significantly. Standing caused significant increases in the SNS indicator and decreases in the R-R interval in both genders. The PNS indicator was higher in women than in men in the left lateral decubitus posture. The 6 min hand-immersion CPT provoked cardiac sympathetic activation and parasympathetic withdrawal; however, it is best suited to studies with a repeated measures design, as analysis of reliability suggests that responses are highly variable between individuals. Performing the CPT in the left lateral decubitus position may prevent vasovagal responses.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations91
Published2006
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied Physiology Nutrition and MetabolismSame topicHeart Rate Variability and Autonomic ControlFrench-language works237,207