MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2157934116 · doi:10.1152/ajpregu.00402.2005

Renal autoregulation: new perspectives regarding the protective and regulatory roles of the underlying mechanisms

2006· review· en· W2157934116 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Physiology-Regulatory, Integrative and Comparative Physiology · 2006
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBlood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney DiseasesNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsTubuloglomerular feedbackAutoregulationRenal functionKidneyInternal medicineRenal blood flowHomeostasisBlood pressureRenal physiologyMedicineMechanism (biology)EndocrinologyHemodynamicsCardiologyNeuroscienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

When the kidney is subjected to acute increases in blood pressure (BP), renal blood flow (RBF) and glomerular filtration rate (GFR) are observed to remain relatively constant. Two mechanisms, tubuloglomerular feedback (TGF) and the myogenic response, are thought to act in concert to achieve a precise moment-by-moment regulation of GFR and distal salt delivery. The current view is that this mechanism insulates renal excretory function from fluctuations in BP. Indeed, the concept that renal autoregulation is necessary for normal renal function and volume homeostasis has long been a cornerstone of renal physiology. This article presents a very different view, at least regarding the myogenic component of this response. We suggest that its primary purpose is to protect the kidney against the damaging effects of hypertension. The arguments advanced take into consideration the unique properties of the afferent arteriolar myogenic response that allow it to protect against the oscillating systolic pressure and the accruing evidence that when this response is impaired, the primary consequence is not a disturbed volume homeostasis but rather an increased susceptibility to hypertensive injury. It is suggested that redundant and compensatory mechanisms achieve volume regulation, despite considerable fluctuations in distal delivery, and the assumed moment-by-moment regulation of renal hemodynamics is questioned. Evidence is presented suggesting that additional mechanisms exist to maintain ambient levels of RBF and GFR within normal range, despite chronic alterations in BP and severely impaired acute responses to pressure. Finally, the implications of this new perspective on the divergent roles of the myogenic response to pressure vs. the TGF response to changes in distal delivery are considered, and it is proposed that in addition to TGF-induced vasoconstriction, vasodepressor responses to reduced distal delivery may play a critical role in modulating afferent arteriolar reactivity to integrate the regulatory and protective functions of the renal microvasculature.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.657
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.004
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.267 · 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