Cardiovascular responses to lower body negative pressure before and after 4 h of head-down bed rest and seated control in men and women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cardiovascular deconditioning after a 4-h head-down bed rest (HDBR) might be a consequence of the time of day relative to pre-HDBR testing, or simply 4 h of confinement and inactivity rather than the posture change. Ten men and 11 women were studied during lower body negative pressure (LBNP) before and after 4-h HDBR and 4-h seated posture (SEAT) as a control for time of day and physical inactivity effects to test the hypotheses that cardiovascular deconditioning was a consequence of the HDBR posture, and that women would have a greater deconditioning response. Following HDBR, men and women had lower blood volume, higher heart rate with a greater increase during LBNP, a greater decrease of stroke volume during LBNP, lower central venous pressure, smaller inferior vena cava diameter, higher portal vein resistance index with a greater increase during LBNP, but lower forearm vascular resistance, lower norepinephrine, and lower renin. Women had lower vasopressin and men had higher vasopressin after HDBR, and women had lower pelvic impedance and men higher pelvic impedance. Following SEAT, brachial vascular resistance was reduced, thoracic impedance was elevated, the reduction of central venous pressure during LBNP was changed, women had higher angiotensin II whereas men had lower levels, and pelvic impedance increased in women and decreased in men. Cardiovascular deconditioning was greater after 4-h HDBR than after SEAT. Women and men had similar responses for most cardiovascular variables in the present study that tested the responses to LBNP after short-duration HDBR compared with a control condition.
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) | 0.001 | 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".