Respiratory motor activity: influence of neuromodulators and implications for sleep disordered breathingThis paper is one of a selection of papers published in this Special Issue, entitled Young Investigators' Forum.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sleep, especially rapid-eye-movement sleep, causes fundamental modifications of respiratory muscle activity and control mechanisms, modifications that can predispose individuals to sleep-related breathing disorders. One of the most common of these disorders is obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) that affects approximately 4% of adults. OSA is caused by repeated episodes of pharyngeal airway obstruction that can occur hundreds of times per night, leading to recurrent asphyxia, arousals from sleep, daytime sleepiness, and adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular consequences. OSA is caused by the effects of sleep on pharyngeal muscle tone in individuals with already narrow upper airways. Moreover, since OSA occurs only in sleep, this disorder by definition is a state-dependent process ultimately caused by the influence of sleep neural mechanisms on the activity of pharyngeal motoneurons. This review synthesizes recent findings relating to control of pharyngeal muscle activity across sleep-wake states, with special emphasis on the influence of neuromodulators acting at the hypoglossal motor nucleus that inervates the genioglossus muscle of the tongue. The results of such basic physiological studies may be relevant to identifying and developing new pharmacological strategies to augment pharyngeal muscle activity in sleep, especially rapid-eye-movement sleep, as potential treatments for OSA.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
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".