Ankle-Brachial Index on Kilimanjaro: Lessons from High Altitude
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study investigated the effects of a high-sympathetic stimulus environment (high-altitude hypoxia) on limb-specific systolic blood pressure (sBP) and ankle-brachial index (ABI) in normal volunteers. We hypothesized that currently accepted normal values for ABI may in fact not reflect an actual normal vascular state in all patients. METHODS: Twenty climbers (17 males, 3 females) from Gatineau-Hull (Québec, Canada) participated in this study and ascended Mount Kilimanjaro, Africa. Ankle-brachial index measurements were performed at sea level and on Mount Kilimanjaro at approximately 4100 m. The data were analyzed using predictive analytics software SPSS 14.0. Data obtained at sea level were compared to those obtained at approximately 4100 m, with participants serving as their own controls. RESULTS: Ankle-brachial indices measured at approximately 4100 m (mean = 1.20) were greater than those measured at sea level (mean = 0.97) (n = -6.23; 95% CI: -.32 to -.17; P < .001). There were no significant differences between the systolic brachial pressures at approximately 4100 m when compared to those at sea level (P = .814). Contrarily, systolic ankle pressures at sea level (mean = 132) were significantly greater than those measured at approximately 4100 m (mean = 152) (t = -3.5, 95% CI: -29 to -7.4; P = .002). CONCLUSIONS: This study is the first to physiologically demonstrate that in response to a high adrenergic stimulus in healthy volunteers there is a greater increase in sBP in the legs vs the arms.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".