MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Effects of Inspiratory Pressure Rise Time and Hypoxic or Hypercapnic Breathing on Inspiratory Laryngeal Constrictor Muscle Activity During Nasal Pressure Support Ventilation

2015· article· en· W223613958 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Vincent Carrière, Danny Cantin, Stéphanie Nault, Charlène Nadeau, Nathalie Samson, Jennifer Beck, Jean‐Paul Praud

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Care Medicine · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRespiratory Support and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversité de SherbrookeSt. Michael's Hospital
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicineVentilation (architecture)AnesthesiaPeak inspiratory pressureRespiratory systemTidal volumeInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: We previously reported the development of an active inspiratory laryngeal narrowing against ventilator insufflations when inspiratory pressure is increased during nasal pressure support ventilation in lambs. The present study aimed to further understand the factors involved in this inspiratory laryngeal narrowing. More specifically, we tested the hypothesis that a short inspiratory pressure rise time or a low PaCO2 level promotes inspiratory laryngeal narrowing observed in nasal pressure support ventilation. The effect of hypoxia was also assessed. DESIGN: Prospective, randomized, interventional study. SETTING: Animal research laboratory at the Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Université de Sherbrooke, Canada. SUBJECTS: Thirteen lambs aged 4-5 days. INTERVENTIONS: Polysomnographic recordings were performed in chronically instrumented lambs to study states of alertness, glottal muscle electrical activity, tracheal pressure, SpO2, and respiratory movements. Lambs were ventilated with progressively increasing levels of nasal pressure support ventilation (10/4, 15/4, and 20/4 cm H2O), using a broad range of inspiratory rise times from 0.05 to 0.4 s. Thereafter, either CO2 (PaCO2 = baseline value + 10 mm Hg) or N2 (PaO2 = 45-55 mm Hg) was added to the inspiratory line. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The percentage of respiratory cycles with phasic inspiratory activity of glottal constrictor muscle was measured and compared between the various experimental conditions. The different inspiratory pressure rise times tested did not alter the phasic inspiratory activity of glottal constrictor muscle during nasal pressure support ventilation. By contrast, this activity was virtually abolished by increasing PaCO2 in all lambs. Finally, no alterations in the phasic inspiratory activity of glottal constrictor muscle during nasal pressure support ventilation were observed during hypoxia. CONCLUSIONS: Active inspiratory laryngeal narrowing during nasal pressure support ventilation is not altered by inspiratory rise times ranging from 0.05 to 0.4 s or by moderate hypoxia, whereas a moderate increase in PaCO2 abolishes this activity.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations5
Published2015
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCritical Care MedicineSame topicRespiratory Support and MechanismsFrench-language works237,207