Autonomic cardiovascular regulation in subjects with acute mountain sickness
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aims of this study were 1) to evaluate whether subjects suffering from acute mountain sickness (AMS) during exposure to high altitude have signs of autonomic dysfunction and 2) to verify whether autonomic variables at low altitude may identify subjects who are prone to develop AMS. Forty-one mountaineers were studied at 4,559-m altitude. AMS was diagnosed using the Lake Louise score, and autonomic cardiovascular function was explored using spectral analysis of R-R interval and blood pressure (BP) variability on 10-min resting recordings. Seventeen subjects (41%) had AMS. Subjects with AMS were older than those without AMS (P < 0.01). At high altitude, the low-frequency (LF) component of systolic BP variability (LF(SBP)) was higher (P = 0.02) and the LF component of R-R variability in normalized units (LF(RR)NU) was lower (P = 0.001) in subjects with AMS. After 3 mo, 21 subjects (43% with AMS) repeated the evaluation at low altitude at rest and in response to a hypoxic gas mixture. LF(RR)NU was similar in the two groups at baseline and during hypoxia at low altitude but increased only in subjects without AMS at high altitude (P < 0.001) and did not change between low and high altitude in subjects with AMS. Conversely, LF(SBP) increased significantly during short-term hypoxia only in subjects with AMS, who also had higher resting BP (P < 0.05) than those without AMS. Autonomic cardiovascular dysfunction accompanies AMS. Marked LF(SBP) response to short-term hypoxia identifies AMS-prone subjects, supporting the potential role of an exaggerated individual chemoreflex vasoconstrictive response to hypoxia in the genesis of AMS.
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) | 0.000 | 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".