Influence of inhaled nitric oxide on gas exchange during normoxic and hypoxic exercise in highly trained cyclists
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study tested the effects of inhaled nitric oxide [NO; 20 parts per million (ppm)] during normoxic and hypoxic (fraction of inspired O(2) = 14%) exercise on gas exchange in athletes with exercise-induced hypoxemia. Trained male cyclists (n = 7) performed two cycle tests to exhaustion to determine maximal O(2) consumption (VO(2 max)) and arterial oxyhemoglobin saturation (Sa(O(2)), Ohmeda Biox ear oximeter) under normoxic (VO(2 max) = 4.88 +/- 0.43 l/min and Sa(O(2)) = 90.2 +/- 0.9, means +/- SD) and hypoxic (VO(2 max) = 4.24 +/- 0.49 l/min and Sa(O(2)) = 75.5 +/- 4.5) conditions. On a third occasion, subjects performed four 5-min cycle tests, each separated by 1 h at their respective VO(2 max), under randomly assigned conditions: normoxia (N), normoxia + NO (N/NO), hypoxia (H), and hypoxia + NO (H/NO). Gas exchange, heart rate, and metabolic parameters were determined during each condition. Arterial blood was drawn at rest and at each minute of the 5-min test. Arterial PO(2) (Pa(O(2))), arterial PCO(2), and Sa(O(2)) were determined, and the alveolar-arterial difference for PO(2) (A-aDO(2)) was calculated. Measurements of Pa(O(2)) and Sa(O(2)) were significantly lower and A-aDO(2) was widened during exercise compared with rest for all conditions (P < 0.05). No significant differences were detected between N and N/NO or between H and H/NO for Pa(O(2)), Sa(O(2)) and A-aDO(2) (P > 0.05). We conclude that inhalation of 20 ppm NO during normoxic and hypoxic exercise has no effect on gas exchange in highly trained cyclists.
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) | 0.000 | 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".