MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2754987107 · doi:10.1152/ajpregu.00261.2017

The plateau in the NIRS-derived [HHb] signal near the end of a ramp incremental test does not indicate the upper limit of O<sub>2</sub> extraction in the vastus lateralis

2017· article· en· W2754987107 on OpenAlexaff
Erin Calaine Inglis, Danilo Iannetta, Juan M. Murias

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Physiology-Regulatory, Integrative and Comparative Physiology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNon-Invasive Vital Sign Monitoring
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPlateau (mathematics)Extraction (chemistry)Limit (mathematics)SIGNAL (programming language)MathematicsChemistryComputer scienceChromatographyMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aimed to examine, at the level of the active muscles, whether the plateau in oxygen (O 2 ) extraction normally observed near the end of a ramp incremental (RI) exercise test to exhaustion is caused by the achievement of an upper limit in O 2 extraction. Eleven healthy men (27.3 ± 3.0 yr, 81.6 ± 8.1 kg, 183.9 ± 6.3 cm) performed a RI cycling test to exhaustion. O 2 extraction of the vastus lateralis (VL) was measured continuously throughout the test using the near-infrared spectroscopy (NIRS)-derived deoxygenated hemoglobin [HHb] signal. A leg blood flow occlusion was performed at rest (LBF OCC1 ) and immediately after the RI test (LBF OCC2 ). The [HHb] values during the resting occlusion (108.1 ± 21.7%; LBF OCC1 ) and the peak values during exercise (100 ± 0%; [HHb] plateau ) were significantly greater than those observed at baseline (0.84 ± 10.6% at baseline 1 and 0 ± 0% at baseline 2) ( P < 0.05). No significant difference was found between LBF OCC1 and [HHb] plateau ( P > 0.05) or between the baseline measurements ( P > 0.05). [HHb] values at LBF OCC2 (130.5 ± 19.7%) were significantly greater than all other time points ( P < 0.05). These results support the existence of an O 2 extraction reserve in the VL muscle at the end of a RI cycling test and suggest that the observed plateau in the [HHb] signal toward the end of a RI test is not representative of an upper limit in O 2 extraction.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations42
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Physiology-Regulatory, Integrative and Comparative PhysiologySame topicNon-Invasive Vital Sign MonitoringFrench-language works237,207