MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Parasternal intercostal and diaphragm function during sleep

2016· article· en· W2343791644 on OpenAlexafffund
Masanori Yokoba, Harvey G. Hawes, Teresa M. Kieser, Masato Katagiri, Paul A. Easton

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Physiology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience of respiration and sleep
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersCanadian Lung Association
KeywordsParasternal lineNon-rapid eye movement sleepIntercostal muscleMedicineAnatomyDiaphragm (acoustics)WakefulnessElectromyographyAnesthesiaCardiologyRespiratory systemEye movementElectroencephalographyPhysical medicine and rehabilitation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Action of the uppermost medial internal intercostal muscles-the parasternals-during rapid eye movement (REM) is uncertain; no direct recordings exist of shortening of these muscles during sleep. Historically, motor inhibition of skeletal muscles during REM sleep is thought to cause global loss of chest wall muscle function, REM "atonia," with preservation of only diaphragm function. However, recent evidence during wakefulness shows parasternals as distinctive obligatory inspiratory muscles. Therefore we hypothesized that attenuation of chest wall function during sleep may spare the parasternals along with the diaphragm, as essential muscles of inspiration during REM. We studied seven canines, comparing costal and crural diaphragm and parasternal intercostal muscle function during wakefulness and non-REM (NREM) and REM sleep, during normal spontaneous sleep, continuously recording ventilation and simultaneous muscle electromyogram (EMG) and length from sonomicrometry microtransducers. Ventilation during sleep declined significantly from wakefulness. From wakefulness to NREM and REM, costal and crural tidal EMG increased, while parasternal tidal EMG was preserved unchanged. Costal and crural shortening per breath during NREM and REM did not change significantly from wakefulness. Concurrently, parasternal shortening decreased equally in both NREM and REM despite preservation of the parasternal EMG. We conclude that diaphragm and parasternals are not inhibited, and both remain active together as essential inspiratory muscles, during REM sleep. The lesser contraction of parasternal intercostals compared with diaphragm may be attributed to net changes in mechanics affecting the chest wall during sleep.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Citations16
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied PhysiologySame topicNeuroscience of respiration and sleepFrench-language works237,207