MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2125057036 · doi:10.1152/ajpheart.00271.2010

Observations of time-based measures of flow-mediated dilation of forearm conduit arteries: implications for the accurate assessment of endothelial function

2010· article· en· W2125057036 on OpenAlexaff
Andrew Liuni, Mary Clare Luca, Monica Lisi, Saverio Dragoni, Giuseppe Di Stolfo, Justin A. Mariani, Amar Uxa, Tommaso Gori, John D. Parker

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Physiology-Heart and Circulatory Physiology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Health and Disease Prevention
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineReactive hyperemiaBrachial arteryCardiologyInternal medicineForearmCoronary artery diseaseCuffEndotheliumBlood pressureBlood flowSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Endothelium-dependent flow-mediated dilation (FMD) is measured as the increase in diameter of a conduit artery in response to reactive hyperemia, assessed either at a fixed time point [usually 60-s post-cuff deflation (FMD(60))] or as the maximal dilation during a 5-min continuous, ECG-gated, measurement (FMD(max-cont)). Preliminary evidence suggests that the time between reactive hyperemia and peak dilation (time to FMD(max)) may provide an additional index of endothelial health. We measured FMD(max-cont), FMD(60), and time to FMD(max) in 30 young healthy volunteers, 22 healthy middle-aged adults, 16 smokers, 23 patients with hypertension, 40 patients with coronary artery disease, and 22 patients with heart failure. As previously reported, FMD(max-cont) was similar in healthy cohorts and was significantly blunted in smokers and all patient groups, whereas FMD(60) was significantly blunted only in heart failure patients. There was a wide within-group variability between measures of time to FMD(max) with no significant difference between normal and patient groups. Intra-arterial infusion of the nitric oxide synthase inhibitor N(omega)-monomethyl-l-arginine in eight healthy subjects resulted in a blunting of FMD(max-cont) (P < 0.001) and FMD(60) (P = 0.02) but not time to FMD(max). Both FMD(max-cont) and FMD(60) demonstrated good repeatability in 30 young healthy volunteers studied on two separate occasions (P < 0.01 for both), whereas time to FMD(max) varied widely between visits (P = not significant). In conclusion, although time to FMD(max) does not appear to be a useful adjunctive measure of endothelial health, the use of continuous diameter measurements provides important data in the study of endothelial function in healthy subjects and patients with cardiovascular disease.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.982
Threshold uncertainty score0.324

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 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

Citations40
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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