Central serotoninergic response to orthostatic challenge in patients with neurocardiogenic syncope
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: To determine whether central serotoninergic system activity is impaired by orthostatic challenge in patients with neurocardiogenic syncope (NCS). METHODS AND RESULTS: Thirty-five [mean age: 24 (SD): 6 years] patients with a clinical history of NCS and positive head-up tilt test and 35 age-matched healthy volunteers (CON = 25+/-5 years) with negative response were studied. Overnight dexamethasone suppression test (DST) (1.5 mg given at 11 p.m.) was performed to assess the sensitivity of the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis by measuring next day cortisol (microg/dL) at 8 a.m. and 4 p.m. Cardiac autonomic function, cortisol, and prolactin (ng/dL) were also determined at baseline supine (BAS) and after 5, 10, and 15 min of orthostatic stress (OS) at 60 degrees . No significant differences were observed in cortisol plasma levels after the DST: CON = 0.6+/-0.6 microg/dL vs. NCS = 0.6+/-0.5; P = 0.7. Cardiac autonomic function, cortisol, and prolactin responses were similar in both study groups (CON vs. NCS; P > 0.05) during BAS: cortisol = 8.6+/-4 vs.8.7+/-4 microg/dL and prolactin = 16.8+/-9 vs. 16.8+/-9 ng/dL; OS-5: cortisol = 8.7+/-5 vs. 8.5+/-4 microg/dL and prolactin = 16.9+/-9 vs. 15.8+/-9 ng/dL; OS-10: cortisol = 8.5+/-5 vs. 8.1+/-3 microg/dL; prolactin = 16.2+/-9 vs. 15.8+/-9 ng/dL, and OS-15: cortisol = 9.0+/-5 vs. 8.4+/-4 microg/dL; prolactin = 17.1+/-9 vs. 15.5+/-9 ng/dL. CONCLUSION: Central serotoninergic response during orthostatic challenge was not impaired in patients with recurrent NCS. These findings suggest that the activation of the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis is not altered in patients with recurrent NCS.
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".