MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W246203836 · doi:10.5114/aoms.2015.50974

State of the art paper The trigeminocardiac reflex – a comparison with the diving reflex in humans

2015· article· en· W246203836 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueArchives of Medical Science · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Syncope and Autonomic Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReflexMedicineBradycardiaHeart rateStimulationBlood supplyOculocardiac reflexReflex bradycardiaAnesthesiaBlood pressureBlood flowNeuroscienceCardiologyInternal medicineSurgeryPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The trigeminocardiac reflex (TCR) has previously been described in the literature as a reflexive response of bradycardia, hypotension, and gastric hypermotility seen upon mechanical stimulation in the distribution of the trigeminal nerve. The diving reflex (DR) in humans is characterized by breath-holding, slowing of the heart rate, reduction of limb blood flow and a gradual rise in the mean arterial blood pressure. Although the two reflexes share many similarities, their relationship and especially their functional purpose in humans have yet to be fully elucidated. In the present review, we have tried to integrate and elaborate these two phenomena into a unified physiological concept. Assuming that the TCR and the DR are closely linked functionally and phylogenetically, we have also highlighted the significance of these reflexes in humans.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.874
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.287 · 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