MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2188714259 · doi:10.1152/jappl.2001.91.5.2010

Muscle chemoreflex elevates muscle blood flow and O<sub>2</sub> uptake at exercise onset in nonischemic human forearm

2001· article· en· W2188714259 on OpenAlexaff
Stéphane Perrey, Michael E. Tschakovsky, Richard L. Hughson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Physiology · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular and exercise physiology
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsForearmBlood flowInternal medicineMedicinePhysical exerciseCardiologyHemodynamicsBlood pressureEndocrinologyAnesthesiaAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We tested the hypothesis that increases in forearm blood flow (FBF) during the adaptive phase at the onset of moderate exercise would allow a more rapid increase in muscle O2 uptake (VO2 mus). Fifteen subjects completed forearm exercise in control (Con) and leg occlusion (Occ) conditions. In Occ, exercise of ischemic calf muscles was performed before the onset of forearm exercise to activate the muscle chemoreflex evoking a 25-mmHg increase in mean arterial pressure that was sustained during forearm exercise. Eight subjects who increased FBF during Occ compared with Con in the adaptation phase by >30 ml/min were considered "responders." For the responders, a higher VO2 mus accompanied the higher FBF only during the adaptive phase of the Occ tests, whereas there was no difference in the baseline or steady-state FBF or VO2 mus between Occ and Con. Supplying more blood flow at the onset of exercise allowed a more rapid increase in VO2 mus supporting our hypothesis that, at least for this type of exercise, O2 supply might be limiting.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.397
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.228 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations35
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied PhysiologySame topicCardiovascular and exercise physiologyFrench-language works237,207