Reduction of heart rate, but not heart rate variability, in diabetic rats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Reduction of heart rate is an early event in type 1 diabetes mellitus (DM) in a number of species including rats, rabbits, and humans. This reduction has been attributed to baroreflex dysfunction resulting from increased parasympathetic tone (McDowell et al AJP 1994; 266: H235). DM was induced by streptozotocin in Long Evans rats (intact, n=5 & DM n=7). Systolic pressure did not differ between the groups. 24h average heart rate declined from 362 ± 4 at control to 356 ± 3 at week 3 and 346 ± 4 min −1 at week 11 in intact rats and from 370 ± to 328 ± 6 and 300 ± 6 min −1 in DM (decline p < 0.00003 versus intact). However, heart rate variability, expressed as coefficient of variation, was unchanged. We had previously shown that spectral analysis of blood pressure from heart rate (~6 Hz) to circadian (0.0000115 Hz) readily detects the roughly fivefold increase in blood pressure (BP) spectral power induced by chemoreceptors‐sparing partial baroreceptor denervation. This increase occurs only in the interval from 0.08 Hz out to 0.0004 Hz. Here we used spectral analysis of inter‐beat interval (one hour record) and of BP to compare intact and DM rats at the three time points. Repeated measures ANOVA was used to compare intact and DM rats in the frequency band noted above and in standard very low frequency (0.02 ‐ 0.2 Hz), low frequency (0.2 ‐ 0.6 Hz), and high frequency (0.6 ‐ 3 Hz) bands. As expected there were no differences between groups in the control condition. However there were also no differences between the intact and DM rats at weeks 3 and 11. To the extent that this analysis probes arterial baroreflex is, we can detect no differences between intact and diabetic rats. Funded by Heart & Stroke Fdn of BC & Yukon
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".