Effects of postnatal smoke exposure on laryngeal chemoreflexes in newborn lambs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Laryngeal chemoreflexes (LCR), which are elicited by the contact of liquids such as gastric refluxate with laryngeal mucosa, may trigger some cases of sudden infant death syndrome. Indeed, while LCR in mature mammals consist of protective responses, previous animal data have shown that LCR in immature newborns can include laryngospasm, apnea, bradycardia, and desaturation. The present study was aimed at testing the hypothesis that postnatal exposure to cigarette smoke is responsible for enhancing cardiorespiratory inhibition observed with LCR. Eight lambs were exposed to cigarette smoke (20 cigarettes/day) over 16 days and compared with seven control lambs. Urinary cotinine/creatinine ratio was measured at a level relevant to previously published levels in infants. On days 15 and 16, 0.5 ml of HCl (pH 2), milk, distilled water, or saline was injected onto the larynx via a chronic supraglottal catheter during sleep. Results showed that exposure to cigarette smoke enhanced respiratory inhibition (P < 0.05) and tended to enhance cardiac inhibition and decrease swallowing and arousal during LCR (P < 0.1). Overall, these results were observed independently of the state of alertness and the experimental solution tested. In conclusion, 16-day postnatal exposure to cigarette smoke increases cardiorespiratory inhibition and decreases protective mechanisms during LCR in nonsedated full-term lambs.
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".