WISE-2005: adrenergic responses of women following 56-days, 6° head-down bed rest with or without exercise countermeasures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We tested the hypotheses that women completing 56 days, 6 degrees head-down bed-rest (HDBR) would have changes in sensitivity of cardiovascular responses to adrenergic receptor stimulation and that frequent aerobic and resistive exercise would prevent these changes. Twenty-four women, eight controls, eight exercisers (lower body negative pressure treadmill and flywheel resistance exercise), and eight receiving nutritional supplement but no exercise were studied in baseline and during administration of the beta-agonist isoproterenol (ISO) and the alpha- and beta-agonist norepinephrine (NOR). In the control and nutrition groups, HDBR increased heart rate (HR) and reduced stroke volume (SV), and there was a significantly greater increase in HR with ISO after HDBR. In contrast, the HR and SV of the exercise group were unchanged from pre-HDBR. After HDBR, leg vascular resistance (LVR) was greater than pre-HDBR in the exercise group but reduced in control and nutrition. LVR was reduced with ISO and increased with NOR. Changes in total peripheral resistance were similar to those of LVR but of smaller magnitude, perhaps because changes in cerebrovascular resistance index were directionally opposite to those of LVR. There were no changes in sensitivity of the vascular resistance responses to adrenergic stimulation. The HR response might reflect a change in sensitivity or a necessary response to the reduction in SV after HDBR in control and nutrition groups. The reduced peripheral vascular resistance after HDBR might help to explain orthostatic intolerance in women. Exercise was an effective countermeasure to the HDBR effects.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".