MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2518038000 · doi:10.1139/cjpp-2015-0196

Temperature-dependent inotropic and lusitropic indices based on half-logistic time constants for four segmental phases in isovolumic left ventricular pressure–time curve in excised, cross-circulated canine heart

2016· article· en· W2518038000 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ju Mizuno, Satoshi Mohri, Takeshi Yokoyama, Mikiya Otsuji, Hideko Arita, Kazuo Hanaoka

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Physiology and Pharmacology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHeart Rate Variability and Autonomic Control
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLusitropyInotropeInternal medicineCardiologyTime constantVentricular pressureMedicineChemistryHemodynamicsBlood pressureDiastole

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Varying temperature affects cardiac systolic and diastolic function and the left ventricular (LV) pressure-time curve (PTC) waveform that includes information about LV inotropism and lusitropism. Our proposed half-logistic (h-L) time constants obtained by fitting using h-L functions for four segmental phases (Phases I-IV) in the isovolumic LV PTC are more useful indices for estimating LV inotropism and lusitropism during contraction and relaxation periods than the mono-exponential (m-E) time constants at normal temperature. In this study, we investigated whether the superiority of the goodness of h-L fits remained even at hypothermia and hyperthermia. Phases I-IV in the isovolumic LV PTCs in eight excised, cross-circulated canine hearts at 33, 36, and 38 °C were analyzed using h-L and m-E functions and the least-squares method. The h-L and m-E time constants for Phases I-IV significantly shortened with increasing temperature. Curve fitting using h-L functions was significantly better than that using m-E functions for Phases I-IV at all temperatures. Therefore, the superiority of the goodness of h-L fit vs. m-E fit remained at all temperatures. As LV inotropic and lusitropic indices, temperature-dependent h-L time constants could be more useful than m-E time constants for Phases I-IV.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations2
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Physiology and PharmacologySame topicHeart Rate Variability and Autonomic ControlFrench-language works237,207