The Hemodynamic Response to Blood Loss in the Conscious Rat
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The hemodynamic response to progressive blood loss passes through three distinct phases: an initial normotensive compensatory phase, a secondary hypotensive decompensatory phase, and a posthemorrhage recompensatory phase. The role of cardiac vagal and cardiac spinal signals in triggering the different phases of the response to hemorrhage was evaluated in the unanesthetized, freely moving rat by observing the effects on the response to 30% blood loss of prior cardiac vagal deafferentation (bilateral vagal rhizotomy) or prior cardiac spinal deafferentation (bilateral stellate ganglionectomy). In comparison to control animals, it was found that (i) cardiac spinal deafferentation significantly delayed the onset of the decompensatory phase, and (ii) cardiac vagal deafferentation slightly potentiated the decompensatory phase and impaired the recompensatory phase. These results indicate that it is cardiac spinal signals, rather than cardiac vagal signals, which in the conscious rat contribute to the triggering and progression of the decompensatory response to blood loss.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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".