Venous filling and elastance in the calf positioned above and below heart level.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Limb venous compliance is a major factor in determining the extent of blood pooling during orthostatic stress. We measured the filling of the calf and of its major veins at different postures and quantified the venous contribution to the total volume shift of the calf. The results were also used to determine the venous elastance and to gain some information on the filling of the small veins. METHODS: Twelve healthy volunteers participated in the study. The calf volume was measured with strain gauge plethysmography and the veins were imaged with ultrasound in the following positions: supine, sitting with both legs horizontal, sitting with one leg suspended, and supine with one leg raised. Cross-sectional areas of the imaged veins were calculated from the measured diameters. Hydrostatic change in the venous pressure was assumed when calculating the venous elastance. RESULTS: The maximal increase in the calf area was up to 1 cm2. The large veins accounted for approximately 30% of the total volume shift of the calf except in cases where the subjects had one leg suspended. Then, the contribution of the large veins was less than 20%. The estimated elastance of the large veins was 80 +/- 14 mmHg, which may be regarded as substantial. CONCLUSIONS: The study suggests that there is a distinct difference in the filling of the small and the large leg veins. The small veins may be the principal contributors to the total compliance of the calf when the venous pressure is above 30 mmHg.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".