MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Comparing The Dynamic Response Characteristics Of Flow-mediated Dilation In The Brachial And Radial Arteries

2011· article· en· W2320881085 on OpenAlexaff
Trevor J. King, Farah Jazuli, Kyra E. Pyke

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Health and Disease Prevention
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBrachial arteryMedicineCardiologyShear stressInternal medicineRadial arteryShear rateDoppler ultrasoundBlood flowDilation (metric space)ArteryMaterials scienceBlood pressureMathematicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent research indicates that smaller arteries tend to dilate more when exposed to shear stress (flow mediated dilation (FMD)) vs. larger arteries. However, the dynamic characteristics of FMD have not been compared in differently sized vessels. PURPOSE: To compare the Phase 1 (initial dilation) dynamics of the FMD response in the radial artery (RA) and the brachial artery (BA). METHODS: N = 15 healthy male subjects. BA and RA diameter and mean blood flow velocity (MBV) were measured by echo and Doppler ultrasound respectively. Rhythmic handgrip exercise was used to create a shear rate (shear rate (SR) estimate of shear stress = vessel diameter/MBV) of 60 s-1 for 6 minutes in the BA and RA. Subjects performed 3 exercise trials at the 60 s-1 SR target in each artery over three visits. These trials were averaged to provide one mean RA and one mean BA response. Curve fitting allowed determination of the phase 1 response dynamics (time delay (TD1) and time constant (tau 1)). Data are reported as means ± SD. RESULTS: RA diameter was 0.215 ± 0.0445 mm; BA diameter was 0.368 ± 0.0664 mm (P=0.002). The shear rate achieved in the RA (56.027 ± 3.935 s-1) and BA (57.939 ± 5.850 ss) was not significantly different (P = 0.120). The Phase 1 %FMD and %FMD at the end of the 6 min exercise bout were significantly greater in the RA (RA phase 1 = 6.25 ± 3.42%; 6 min 9.84 ± 3.99 %; BA 2.59 ± 1.69%; 6min 2.526 ± 1.96 %)(phase 1 P=0.005; 6min P=<0.001)). The RA had a significantly shorter TD1 (9.60 ±15.42 s) than BA (31.80 ± 26.15 s) (P = 0.017). However there was no significant difference in the speed of the phase 1 response (tau1) between the BA (51.30 ± 43.26 s) and RA (65.75 ± 38.40s) (P = 0.461). TD1 was modestly correlated with percent FMD in the RA (r2 = 0.146, P = 0.039) but not in the BA (r2 =.205, P = 0.104). Tau1 was not correlated with FMD in either the RA (P = 0.583) or the BA (P = 0.104). CONCLUSION: When experiencing a SR of 60 s-1, the RA began to dilate sooner (shorter TD1) and had a greater phase 1 %FMD magnitude than the BA. However, no differences could be detected in the speed of the phase 1 response (tau1). FMD response dynamics were largely unrelated to FMD magnitude. The distinct phase I FMD magnitudes and time delays in response to the same shear rate indicate vessel specific differences in the initiation of the FMD response. Supported by NSERC and CFI.

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 score0.005

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.257 · 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

Citations1
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicine & Science in Sports & ExerciseSame topicCardiovascular Health and Disease PreventionFrench-language works237,207