MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2120662805 · doi:10.1113/jphysiol.2005.089755

The relationship between shear stress and flow‐mediated dilatation: implications for the assessment of endothelial function

2005· review· en· W2120662805 on OpenAlexafffund
Kyra E. Pyke, Michael E. Tschakovsky

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Physiology · 2005
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Health and Disease Prevention
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsHyperaemiaStimulus (psychology)VasodilationShear stressEndotheliumMedicineEndothelial dysfunctionNitric oxideCardiologyInternal medicineBlood flowMechanicsPsychologyCognitive psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Endothelium-dependent flow-mediated dilatation (FMD) describes the vasodilatory response of a vessel to elevations in blood flow-associated shear stress. Nitric oxide (NO), one of many vasoactive substances released by the endothelium in response to shear stress, is of particular interest to researchers as it is an antiatherogenic molecule, and a reduction in its bioavailability may play a role in the pathogenesis of vascular disease. The goal of many human studies is to create a shear stress stimulus that produces an NO-dependent response in order to use the FMD measurements as an assay of NO bioavailability. The most common non-invasive technique is the 'reactive hyperaemia test' which produces a large, transient shear stress profile and a corresponding FMD. Importantly, not all FMD is NO mediated and the stimulus creation technique is a critical determinant of NO dependence. The purpose of this review is to (1) explain that the mechanisms of FMD depend on the nature of the shear stress stimulus (stimulus response specificity), (2) provide an update to the current guidelines for FMD assessment, and (3) summarize the issues that surround the clinical utility of measuring both NO- and non-NO-mediated FMD. Future research should include (1) the identification and partitioning of mechanisms responsible for FMD in response to various shear stress profiles, (2) investigation of stimulus response specificity in coronary arteries, and (3) investigation of non-NO FMD mechanisms and their connection to the development of vascular disease and occurrence of cardiovascular events.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.092
GPT teacher head0.419
Teacher spread0.326 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations604
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of PhysiologySame topicCardiovascular Health and Disease PreventionFrench-language works237,207