MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Reproducibility Of The Hemodynamic And Leg Vascular Response To Cold-Pressor Stimulation

2011· article· en· W2324870725 on OpenAlexaffabout
Ryan F. Roszko, Tim P. Just, Duncan A. Raymond, Nicholas Jendzjowsky, Darren S. DeLorey

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHeart Rate Variability and Autonomic Control
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSupine positionReproducibilityMedicineHemodynamicsVascular resistanceCold pressor testBlood pressureHeart ratePhotoplethysmogramAnesthesiaHaemodynamic responseCoefficient of variationMean arterial pressureCardiac outputRepeated measures designCardiologyInternal medicineChemistryMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The cold-pressor test (CPT) is commonly used to assess the cardiovascular response to physiological stress. The day-to-day reproducibility and intra-subject variability of the physiological response to the CPT has not been established. PURPOSE: To determine the reproducibility and within-subject variability of the hemodynamic and leg vascular response to CPT stimulation. It was hypothesized that the hemodynamic and leg vascular response would be reproducible. METHODS: Young, healthy males (mean ± SD; Age: 25 ± 3 yrs; Height: 175 ± 4 cm; Body Mass: 76 ± 13 kg; n=6) completed a CPT at approximately the same time of day on 3 separate occasions. Trials were separated by a minimum of 24 hours. Testing began with a 5 min supine baseline period, after which subjects immersed their hand in -1°C ice water for 5 min, followed by a 5 min recovery period. Mean arterial pressure (MAP) was calculated on a beat-by-beat basis from the blood pressure waveform using finger photoplethysmography (Finometer; Finapres Medical Systems). Cardiac output was determined by the Modelflow method and total peripheral resistance (TPR) was calculated. Femoral artery blood flow was measured continuously via Doppler ultrasound (Vivid-I; GE Medical) and femoral vascular resistance (FVR; mmHg.mL-1.min-1) was calculated. The change of each variable at min 2 of the CPT was calculated as a percent change from the supine baseline value. Reproducibility of the response across days was determined by one-way repeated measures ANOVA. Within subject variability was assessed by coefficient of variation (CV). RESULTS: The changes in MAP (Day 1: 27 ± 10%; Day 2: 31 ± 10%; Day 3: 31 ± 10%; p > 0.05), TPR (Day 1: 20 ± 10; Day 2: 22 ± 9; Day 3: 19 ± 9; p > 0.05) and FVR (Day 1: 117 ± 50; Day 2: 118 ± 58; Day 3: 86 ± 40; p > 0.05) were not different between days. The within subject CV ranged from 9 to 32 %, 10 to 74 %, and 19 to 42 % for MAP, TPR and FVR, respectively. CONCLUSION: The hemodynamic and leg vascular response to a CPT appears to be reproducible across days, however the substantial intra-subject variability suggests that it is advisable to average repeat tests on an individual to determine vascular reactivity to the CPT. Supported by NSERC, Canada.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Reproducibility · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.998
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.256 · 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.

Study designObservational
DomainReproducibility
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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicine & Science in Sports & ExerciseSame topicHeart Rate Variability and Autonomic ControlFrench-language works237,207