Effects of neck flexion and mouth opening on inspiratory flow dynamics in awake humans
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Phrenic nerve stimulation (PNS) can assess airflow dynamics of the upper airway (UA) during wakefulness in man. Using PNS, we aimed to assess the impact of neck flexion and mouth opening in promoting UA unstability. Measurements were made during nasal breathing in seven healthy subjects (ages = 23-39 yr; one woman). Surface diaphragm electromyogram, esophageal pressure referenced to mask pressure, and flow were recorded during diaphragm twitches with neck in neutral position and mouth closed and then with neck flexion and/or mouth opening. Twitches always exhibited a flow-limited pattern. Flow-limiting driving pressure (Pd) and peak Pd were increased by neck flexion (P < 0.01) without significant change in the corresponding flows. UA resistances at these flow values were higher with the neck flexed (P < 0.05). Mouth opening alone did not exert any significant influence. We conclude that the position of the neck has a discernible impact on the flow behavior through the nonphasically active UA faced with a negative Pd.
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".