Effects of Isoflurane on the Auditory Brainstem Responses and Middle Latency Responses of Rats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effects of a volatile anesthetic, isoflurane, on auditory brainstem responses (ABRs) and middle latency responses (MLRs) recorded in rats. MATERIAL AND METHODS: ABRs and MLRs evoked by click stimuli were simultaneously recorded in eight rats in the awake condition and during anesthesia with isoflurane at clinically relevant concentrations. RESULTS: Vertex-recorded ABRs showed a significant increase in the latency of waves I-IV during anesthesia and the latency changes appeared to be significantly related to the isoflurane concentration. The I-IV interval also appeared to be significantly increased in comparison to the awake condition, while minor changes in ABR amplitudes were induced by isoflurane. MLRs, which were recorded by means of epidural electrodes implanted over the auditory cortex, appeared to be attenuated in amplitude and increased in latency during anesthesia. Only latency changes appeared to be significantly related to the isoflurane concentration. Moreover, "bursts" of high amplitude MLRs were observed during anesthesia at each concentration. CONCLUSION: The present findings indicate that both ABR and MLR latencies are increased by isoflurane in a concentration-dependent manner, whilst the anesthetic-induced attenuation in amplitude does not appear to be related to the isoflurane concentration.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 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".