Physiological Mechanisms Mediating the Coupling between Heart Period and Arterial Pressure in Response to Postural Changes in Humans
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The upright posture strengthens the coupling between heart period (HP) and systolic arterial pressure (SAP) consistently with a greater contribution of the arterial baroreflex to cardiac control, while paradoxically decreasing cardiac baroreflex sensitivity (cBRS). To investigate the physiological mechanisms that mediate the coupling between HP and SAP in response to different postures, we analyzed the cross-correlation functions between low-frequency HP and SAP fluctuations and estimated cBRS with the sequence technique in healthy male subjects during passive head-up tilt test (HUTT, n = 58), during supine wakefulness, supine slow-wave sleep (SWS), and in the seated and active standing positions (n = 8), and during progressive loss of 1 L blood (n = 8) to decrease central venous pressure in the supine position. HUTT, SWS, the seated, and the standing positions, but not blood loss, entailed significant increases in the positive correlation between HP and the previous SAP values, which is the expected result of arterial baroreflex control, compared with baseline recordings in the supine position during wakefulness. These increases were mirrored by increases in the low-frequency variability of SAP in each condition but SWS. cBRS decreased significantly during HUTT, in the seated and standing positions, and after blood loss compared with baseline during wakefulness. These decreases were mirrored by decreases in the RMSSD index, which reflects cardiac vagal modulation. These results support the view that the cBRS decrease associated with the upright posture is a byproduct of decreased cardiac vagal modulation, triggered by the arterial baroreflex in response to central hypovolemia. Conversely, the greater baroreflex contribution to cardiac control associated with upright posture may be explained, at least in part, by enhanced fluctuations of SAP, which elicit a more effective entrainment of HP fluctuations by the arterial baroreflex. These SAP fluctuations may result from enhanced fluctuations of vascular resistance specific to the upright posture, and not be driven by the accompanying central hypovolemia.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".