Diaphragm and genioglossus corticomotor excitability in patients with obstructive sleep apnea and control subjects
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Corticomotor excitability of peripheral muscles appears to be altered in patients with obstructive sleep apnea. However, there is no evidence of such alteration for upper airway/respiratory muscles that are involved in the pathophysiology of this disease. The aim of this study was to compare the effects of hypercapnic stimulation on diaphragm and genioglossus corticomotor excitability in awake healthy subjects versus patients with obstructive sleep apnea. Corticomotor excitability was assessed by transcranial magnetic stimulation in 12 untreated apneic men (48 ± 10 years; body mass index = 28.9 ± 4.7 kg m(-2); apnea-hypopnoea index = 41 ± 23 events per hour) and nine control men (45 ± 10 years; body mass index = 27.3 ± 3.3 kg m(-2); apnea-hypopnoea index = 7 ± 4 events per hour). Assessments included diaphragm and genioglossus expiratory motor thresholds, and transcranial magnetic stimulation-induced motor-evoked potential characteristics obtained while breathing room air or 5% CO2 (random order) and then 7% CO2 both balanced with pure O2. Transcranial magnetic stimulation twitches were applied during early inspiration and end expiration. Diaphragm motor-evoked potential amplitudes increased and expiratory diaphragm motor-evoked potential latencies decreased during CO2-induced increase in ventilatory drive, with no difference in these responses between patients with obstructive sleep apnea and control subjects. Expiratory genioglossus motor-evoked potential amplitudes were significantly lower in patients with obstructive sleep apnea than in control subjects. Baseline activity of the genioglossus increased with increasing FiCO2, this effect being significantly higher in patients with obstructive sleep apnea than in control subjects. However, neither genioglossus motor-evoked potential amplitudes nor latencies were significantly modified with increasing FiCO2 both in patients with obstructive sleep apnea and in control subjects. Corticomotor excitability of genioglossus and diaphragm are not altered during CO2-induced increase in ventilatory drive in patients with obstructive sleep apnea.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".