MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2163019482 · doi:10.1139/y02-105

Cerebral blood flow responses to changes in oxygen and carbon dioxide in humans

2002· article· en· W2163019482 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Andrea Vovk, David A. Cunningham, John M. Kowalchuk, Donald H. Paterson, James Duffin

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Physiology and Pharmacology · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular Disturbances
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHyperoxiaCerebral blood flowpCO2AnesthesiaMiddle cerebral arteryBlood flowHypoxia (environmental)Transcranial DopplerMedicineCerebral perfusion pressurePerfusionCerebral autoregulationHemodynamicsMean arterial pressureHypercapniaBlood pressureOxygenCardiologyChemistryInternal medicineHeart rateIschemiaLungAcidosisAutoregulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study characterized cerebral blood flow (CBF) responses in the middle cerebral artery to PCO2 ranging from 30 to 60 mmHg (1 mmHg = 133.322 Pa) during hypoxia (50 mmHg) and hyperoxia (200 mmHg). Eight subjects (25 +/- 3 years) underwent modified Read rebreathing tests in a background of constant hypoxia or hyperoxia. Mean cerebral blood velocity was measured using a transcranial Doppler ultrasound. Ventilation (VE), end-tidal PCO2 (PETCO2), and mean arterial blood pressure (MAP) data were also collected. CBF increased with rising PETCO2 at two rates, 1.63 +/- 0.21 and 2.75 +/- 0.27 cm x s(-1) x mmHg(-1) (p < 0.05) during hypoxic and 1.69 +/- 0.17 and 2.80 +/- 0.14 cm x s(-1) x mmHg(-1) (p < 0.05) during hyperoxic rebreathing. VE also increased at two rates (5.08 +/- 0.67 and 10.89 +/- 2.55 L min(-1) m mHg(-1) and 3.31 +/- 0.50 and 7.86 +/- 1.43 L x min(-1) x mmHg(-1)) during hypoxic and hyperoxic rebreathing. MAP and PETCO2 increased linearly during both hypoxic and hyperoxic rebreathing. The breakpoint separating the two-component rise in CBF (42.92 +/- 1.29 and 49.00 +/- 1.56 mmHg CO2 during hypoxic and hyperoxic rebreathing) was likely not due to PCO2 or perfusion pressure, since PETCO2 and MAP increased linearly, but it may be related to VE, since both CBF and VE exhibited similar responses, suggesting that the two responses may be regulated by a common neural linkage.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.244 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations35
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Physiology and PharmacologySame topicTraumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular DisturbancesFrench-language works237,207