Effects of Postnatal Environmental Tobacco Smoke on Cardiorespiratory Control in Newborn Lambs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While prenatal environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) exposure has been shown to be a major cause of sudden infant death syndrome, the effects of postnatal ETS exposure have been less studied.The objective of this study is to explore the effects of 15-days postnatal exposure to 20 cigarettes/day on heart rate variability (HRV), respiratory rate variability (RRV) and cardiorespiratory interrelations in newborn lambs.On postnatal day 16, sixhours polysomnographic recording was obtained from six control lambs exposed to room air (group C0) and six lambs exposed to 20 cigarettes/day (group C20) for the first 15 days of life.ECG and respiratory movements (RSP) were continuously monitored.Several analyses were performed on these signals, including heart rate variability analyses (on the RR intervals extracted from the ECG), respiratory rate variability analyses (on different time series extracted from the breathing signal) and cardiorespiratory interrelations analyses (on both the RR interval and the breathing signal).The results suggest that ETS exposure for the first 15 postnatal days leads to slight alterations of cardiorespiratory control, which predominate on respiration.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".