MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2259347332 · doi:10.1152/jappl.2000.88.6.2246

Effects of length oscillation on the subsequent force development in swine tracheal smooth muscle

2000· article· en· W2259347332 on OpenAlexaff
Lu Wang, Peter D. Paré, Chun Y. Seow

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Physiology · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeonatal Respiratory Health Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaSt. Paul's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBronchoconstrictionIsometric exerciseOscillation (cell signaling)StimulationAmplitudeMuscle contractionRespiratory systemChemistryAnatomyAnesthesiaInternal medicinePhysicsAirwayMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It has been shown that deep inspiration (DI) taken before application of bronchoconstricting stimuli causes a reduction in the subsequent bronchoconstriction; a fast DI has a greater inhibitory effect than a slow DI. We hypothesize that periodic length changes imposed on a relaxed airway smooth muscle (ASM) would attenuate subsequent bronchoconstriction by disrupting the organization of the contractile apparatus, and this could be an important mechanism for the observed bronchoprotective effect of DI and tidal breathing. Length oscillations of different amplitude, frequency, and duration were applied to a relaxed muscle. The effects of such perturbations on force development were then assessed. Results show that oscillations reduce the subsequent force generation and that the magnitude of force reduction is proportional to amplitude and duration of the length oscillation. After the oscillation, isometric force recovered to the preoscillation level in a series of isometric contractions, and the rate of recovery was facilitated by frequent stimulation. The in vitro behavior of ASM found in this study could account for the observed temporary reduction in bronchoconstriction subsequent to a DI.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.285 · 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 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

Citations164
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied PhysiologySame topicNeonatal Respiratory Health ResearchFrench-language works237,207