Autonomic Function in Chronic Alcoholic Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: To investigate the relationship among the alcohol drinking history, autonomic symptom scores (ASS), and the autonomic functions measured with sympathetic skin response (SSR) and heart rate variability (HRV) of alcoholic patients, and to assess the difference between the values from the autonomic function tests of patients and normal controls. Method: SSR and HRV were measured in 44 patients and 26 controls. ASS and Toronto clinical neuropathy scoring system (TCNSS) scores were also assessed. For the HRV, the mean heart rate, standard deviation of the NN intervals (SDNN), total power (TP), very low frequency (VLF), low frequency (LF), and high frequency (HF) in both the supine and standing positions were evaluated. For the SSR, the onset latency and amplitude of both the palm and sole were measured. Results: There were no significant relationships among the alcohol history, the TCNSS, and the results of the autonomic function tests. There were, however, significant relationships among their ASS and some values from autonomic function tests [i.e., the sole amplitudes, the SDNNs (supine), and the TPs (standing)]. There were significant differences between the sole amplitudes of the patients and controls. In HRV, there were significant differences between the patients and controls with respect to their SDNNs and TPs at a standing position. Conclusion: Autonomic function tests such as SSR and HRV are related to ASS, but not to alcohol history and TCNSS. Moreover, the values from the autonomic function tests of the alcoholic patients decreased, unlike the normal controls.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".