MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2117301201 · doi:10.1152/ajpheart.00571.2009

Nitric oxide is not obligatory for radial artery flow-mediated dilation following release of 5 or 10 min distal occlusion

2009· article· en· W2117301201 on OpenAlexaff
Kyra E. Pyke, Daniel J. Green, Cara J. Weisbrod, Matthew J. Best, L. Dembo, Gerry O’Driscoll, Michael E. Tschakovsky

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Physiology-Heart and Circulatory Physiology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Health and Disease Prevention
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOcclusionNitric oxideDilation (metric space)Radial arteryMedicineAnesthesiaCardiologyArteryInternal medicineMathematicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigated the nitric oxide (NO) dependence of radial artery (RA) flow-mediated dilation (FMD) in response to three different reactive hyperemia (RH) shear stimulus profiles. Ten healthy males underwent the following three RH trials: 1) 5 min occlusion (5 trial), 2) 10 min occlusion (10 trial), and 3) 10 min occlusion with cuff reinflation at 30 s (10-30 trial). Trials were performed during saline infusion and repeated during N(G)-monomethyl-L-arginine (L-NMMA) infusion in the brachial artery. RA blood flow velocity was measured with Doppler ultrasound, and B-mode RA images were analyzed using automated edge detection software. Shear rate estimation of shear stress was calculated as the blood flow velocity/vessel diameter. L-NMMA decreased baseline vascular conductance by 35%. L-NMMA infusion did not affect the peak shear rate stimulus (P = 0.681) or the area under the curve (AUC) of shear rate to peak FMD (P = 0.088). The AUC was significantly larger in the 10 trial vs. the 10-30 or 5 trial (P < 0.001). Although percent FMD (%change in diameter) in the 10 trial was larger than that in the 5 trial (P = 0.035), there was no significant difference in %FMD between the saline and L-NMMA conditions in any trial: 5 trial, 5.62 +/- 1.48 vs. 5.63 +/- 1.27%; 10 trial, 9.07 +/- 1.16 vs. 11.22 +/- 2.21%; 10-30 trial, 6.52 +/- 1.43 vs. 7.98 +/- 1.51% for saline and L-NMMA, respectively (P = 0.158). We conclude the following: 1) RH following 10 min of occlusion results in an enhanced stimulus and %FMD compared with 5 min of occlusion. 2) When the occlusion cuff is reinflated 30 s postrelease of a 10 min occlusion, it does not result in an enhanced %FMD compared with that which results from RH following 5 min of occlusion. 3) The lack of effect of L-NMMA on FMD suggests that NO may not be obligatory for radial artery FMD in response to either 5 or 10 min of occlusion in healthy volunteers.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations78
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Physiology-Heart and Circulatory PhysiologySame topicCardiovascular Health and Disease PreventionFrench-language works237,207