Cardiorespiratory interactions during resistive load breathing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The addition to the respiratory system of a resistive load results in breathing pattern changes and in negative intrathoracic pressure increases. The aim of this study was to use resistive load breathing as a stimulus to the cardiorespiratory interaction and to examine the extent of the changes in heart rate variability (HRV) and respiratory sinus arrhythmia (RSA) in relation to the breathing pattern changes. HRV and RSA were studied in seven healthy subjects where four resistive loads were applied in a random order during the breath and 8-min recording made in each condition. The HRV spectral power components were computed from the R-R interval sequences, and the RSA amplitude and phase were computed from the sinusoid fitting the instantaneous heart rate within each breath. Adding resistive loads resulted in 1) increasing respiratory period, 2) unchanging heart rate, and 3) increasing HRV and changing RSA characteristics. HRV and RSA characteristics are linearly correlated to the respiratory period. These modifications appear to be linked to load-induced changes in the respiratory period in each individual, because HRV and RSA characteristics are similar at a respiratory period obtained either by loading or by imposed frequency breathing. The present results are discussed with regard to the importance of the breathing cycle duration in these cardiorespiratory interactions, suggesting that these interactions may depend on the time necessary for activation and dissipation of neurotransmitters involved in RSA.
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".