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 OpenAlexaff
Frédéric Lemaître, Tumul Chowdhury, Bernhard Schaller

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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

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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations55
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArchives of Medical ScienceSame topicCardiovascular Syncope and Autonomic DisordersFrench-language works237,207