Influence of cerebrovascular function on the hypercapnic ventilatory response in healthy humans
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An important determinant of [H(+)] in the environment of the central chemoreceptors is cerebral blood flow. Accordingly we hypothesized that a reduction of brain perfusion or a reduced cerebrovascular reactivity to CO(2) would lead to hyperventilation and an increased ventilatory responsiveness to CO(2). We used oral indomethacin to reduce the cerebrovascular reactivity to CO(2) and tested the steady-state hypercapnic ventilatory response to CO(2) in nine normal awake human subjects under normoxia and hyperoxia (50% O(2)). Ninety minutes after indomethacin ingestion, cerebral blood flow velocity (CBFV) in the middle cerebral artery decreased to 77 +/- 5% of the initial value and the average slope of CBFV response to hypercapnia was reduced to 31% of control in normoxia (1.92 versus 0.59 cm(-1) s(-1) mmHg(-1), P < 0.05) and 37% of control in hyperoxia (1.58 versus 0.59 cm(-1) s(-1) mmHg(-1), P < 0.05). Concomitantly, indomethacin administration also caused 40-60% increases in the slope of the mean ventilatory response to CO(2) in both normoxia (1.27 +/- 0.31 versus 1.76 +/- 0.37 l min(-1) mmHg(-1), P < 0.05) and hyperoxia (1.08 +/- 0.22 versus 1.79 +/- 0.37 l min(-1) mmHg(-1), P < 0.05). These correlative findings are consistent with the conclusion that cerebrovascular responsiveness to CO(2) is an important determinant of eupnoeic ventilation and of hypercapnic ventilatory responsiveness in humans, primarily via its effects at the level of the central chemoreceptors.
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) | 0.000 | 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".