Cardiovascular responses to apneic facial immersion during altered cardiac filling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The hypothesis that reduced cardiac filling, as a result of lower body negative pressure (LBNP) and postexercise hypotension (PEH), would attenuate the reflex changes to heart rate (HR), skin blood flow (SkBF), and mean arterial pressure (MAP) normally induced by facial immersion was tested. The purpose of this study was to investigate the cardiovascular control mechanisms associated with apneic facial immersion during different cardiovascular challenges. Six subjects randomly performed 30-s apneic facial immersions in 6.0 +/- 1.2 degrees C water under the following conditions: 1) -20 mmHg LBNP, 2) +40 mmHg lower body positive pressure (LBPP), 3) during a period of PEH, and 4) normal resting (control). Measurements included SkBF at one acral (distal phalanx of the thumb) and one nonacral region of skin (ventral forearm), HR, and MAP. Facial immersion reduced HR and SkBF at both sites and increased MAP under all conditions (P < 0.05). Reduced cardiac filling during LBNP and PEH significantly attenuated the absolute HR nadir observed during the control immersion (P < 0.05). The LBPP condition did not result in a lower HR nadir than control but did result in a nadir significantly lower than that of the LBNP and PEH conditions (P < 0.05). No differences were observed in either SkBF or MAP between conditions; however, the magnitude of SkBF reduction was greater at the acral site than at the nonacral site for all conditions (P < 0.05). These results suggest that the cardiac parasympathetic response during facial immersion can be attenuated when cardiac filling is compromised.
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 | 0.000 | 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".