MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2106474732 · doi:10.1152/jappl.2000.89.1.259

Age-dependent core temperature responses of conscious rabbits to acute hypoxemia

2000· article· en· W2106474732 on OpenAlexaff
James E. Fewell, Sarah Wong, Kim C. Crisanti

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Physiology · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicThermal Regulation in Medicine
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHypoxemiaCore temperatureCore (optical fiber)AnesthesiaMedicineThermoregulationCardiologyPsychologyInternal medicinePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Experiments were carried out on chronically instrumented newborn and older rabbits to characterize their core temperature (T(c)) responses to acute hypoxemia and to differentiate "forced" vs. "regulated" thermoregulatory responses. Three age ranges of kits were studied: 4-6, 9-11, and 28-30 days of age. During an experiment, T(c), selected ambient temperature (T(a)), and oxygen consumption were measured from kits studied in a thermocline during a control period of normoxemia, an experimental period of normoxemia or hypoxemia (fraction of inspired oxygen 0.10), and a recovery period of normoxemia. We reasoned that no change or a decrease in T(a) while T(c) decreased during hypoxemia would indicate a regulated thermoregulatory response, whereas an increase in T(a) while T(c) decreased during hypoxemia would indicate a forced thermoregulatory response. T(c) decreased during acute hypoxemia in the older kits but not in the 4- to 6-day-old kits; the decrease in T(c) was accentuated on postnatal days 28-30 compared with postnatal days 9-11. T(a) decreased or stayed the same during exposure to acute hypoxemia. Our data provide evidence that postnatal maturation influences the T(c) response of rabbits to acute hypoxemia and that the decrease in T(c) during hypoxemia in the older kits results from a regulated thermoregulatory response.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.520
Threshold uncertainty score0.864

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.279 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations2
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied PhysiologySame topicThermal Regulation in MedicineFrench-language works237,207