MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2129118258 · doi:10.3109/13697137.2011.631231

Effects of estrogen and progesterone on cerebrovascular responses to euoxic hypercapnia in women

2011· letter· en· W2129118258 on OpenAlexafffund
Chantel T. Debert, K. Ide, Marc J. Poulin

Bibliographic record

VenueClimacteric · 2011
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeonatal and fetal brain pathology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchHealth Research Board
KeywordsHypercapniaMedicinepCO2Internal medicineLuteal phaseFollicular phaseEstrogenEndocrinologyTranscranial DopplerMiddle cerebral arteryCerebral blood flowMenstrual cycleBlood flowHormoneIschemiaAcidosis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: To determine the cerebral blood flow response to step changes in end-tidal Pco(2) in premenopausal women (n = 10; mean age±standard deviation 27.0±6.4 years) during the follicular (FP), mid-cycle (MC) and luteal (LP) phases of the menstrual cycle. METHODS: Transcranial Doppler ultrasound was used to measure beat-by-beat averaged peak blood flow velocity (V(p)) in the middle cerebral artery in response to 20 min of euoxic hypercapnia (end-tidal PO(2) = 88 Torr; end-tidal PCO(2) = 7.0 Torr above resting values). The V(p) responses to euoxic hypercapnia were fitted to a simple mathematical model that included gain terms for the on (G(on)) and off (G(off)) responses, time constants for the on (τ(on)) and off (τ(off)) responses, baseline terms and a time delay (T(d)). RESULTS: Serum progesterone levels were significantly greater for LP compared to FP and MC (40.6±13.2 vs. 32.6±1.4 nmol/l (p < 0.001) and 8.8±3.8 nmol/l (p < 0.001), respectively). Serum estrogen concentrations were significantly lower in FP compared to MC and LP (150.9±51.2 vs. 506.5±220.5 pmol/l (p = 0.002) and 589.1±222.8 pmol/l (p < 0.001), respectively). Arterial PCO(2) was significantly greater in MC compared to LP (35.0±2.1 and 32.6±1.4 Torr, respectively; p = 0.02). There was a significant increase in G(off) during LP compared with FP and MC (3.38±0.68 vs. 2.79±0.82 cm s(-1) Torr(-1) (p = 0.021) and 2.74±0.90 (p = 0.018) cm s(-1) Torr2(1), respectively). Progesterone and the estrogen/progesterone ratio contributed to the observed differences in G(off). CONCLUSION: There is an increase in G(off) during LP that is explained, at least in part, by increases in serum progesterone and estrogen and a decrease in arterial PCO(2).

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.225 · 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

Citations8
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClimactericSame topicNeonatal and fetal brain pathologyFrench-language works237,207