Comparison of two indices for forearm noradrenaline release in humans
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although there is as yet no method which measures directly the neuronal release of noradrenaline in humans in vivo, the isotope dilution technique with [(3)H]noradrenaline has been applied to estimate forearm neuronal noradrenaline release into plasma. Two different equations have been developed for this purpose: one to estimate the spillover of noradrenaline into the venous effluent, and a modified formula (often referred to as the appearance rate) which may reflect more closely changes in the neuronal release of noradrenaline into the synaptic cleft, particularly during interventions that alter forearm blood flow. The present study was performed to compare the effects of two interventions known to exert contrasting actions on neuronal forearm noradrenaline release and forearm blood flow. Intra-arterial infusion of sodium nitroprusside at doses without systemic effect increases forearm blood flow, but not neuronal noradrenaline release. In contrast, lower-body negative pressure at -25 mm Hg causes forearm vasoconstriction by stimulating neuronal noradrenaline release. During sodium nitroprusside infusion, forearm noradrenaline spillover increased from 1.1+/-0.3 to 2.2+/-1.0 pmol x min(-1) x 100 ml(-1) (P<0.05), whereas the forearm noradrenaline appearance rate was unchanged. Lower-body negative pressure did not affect the forearm noradrenaline spillover rate, but increased the forearm noradrenaline appearance rate from 3.4+/-0.4 pmol x min(-1) x 100 ml(-1) at baseline to 5.0+/-0.9 pmol x min(-1) x 100 ml(-1) (P<0.05). These results indicate that the noradrenaline appearance rate provides the better approximation of changes in forearm neuronal noradrenaline release in response to stimuli which alter local blood flow.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".