New adrenergic baroreflex evaluation in Valsalva maneuver
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Valsalva maneuver (VM) is a simple and non-invasive technique extensively utilized clinically to detect dysautonomia. VM provides detailed information of baroreflex sensitivity (BRS) which is an important cardiovascular and autonomic marker. However, the current approach for calculating its adrenergic component (BRSa1) is moderately reliable and fails to evaluate atypical VM patterns. Methods: We analyzed typical and atypical VM patterns of 89 young, healthy individuals (30 ±13 years) with the aim of improving BRSa evaluation. Objectives: 1) To determine a new BRSa calculation (BRSa2) applicable to different VM patterns; 2) correlate BRSa2 to BRSa1; 3) compare the internal consistency (ICC) between BRSa1 and BRSa2. Results: The BRSa2 calculation is a complex hemodynamic and time assessment equivalent to the slope in vagal BRS. In contrast to BRSa1, BRSa2 operates with hemodynamic indices easily detectable in any VM pattern. In atypical VM patterns, BRSa2 correlated with BRSa1: “flat-top responses” (r = 0.774, p < 0.01); rapid hemodynamic recovery (r = 0.461, p < 0.05). Most importantly, BRSa2 was more reliable than BRSa1 (ICC= 0.759 versus 0.469). Conclusion: BRSa2 is more reliable and allows atypical responses to VM to be analyzed, which clinically, could help differentiate natural physiological variances and mild adrenergic dysfunction.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".