Is the Cushing mechanism a dynamic blood pressure-stabilizing system? Insights from Granger causality analysis of spontaneous blood pressure and cerebral blood flow
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Blood pressure (BP) regulation is widely recognized as being integral to the control of end-organ perfusion, but it remains unclear whether end-organ perfusion also plays a role in driving changes in BP. A randomized and placebo-controlled study design was followed to examine feedback relationships between very-low-frequency fluctuations in BP and cerebral blood flow (CBF) in humans under placebo treatment and α1-adrenergic blockade. To determine the causal relations among hemodynamic variables, BP, middle cerebral artery blood velocity (MCAv), and end-tidal CO 2 time-series were decimated, low-pass filtered (<0.07 Hz), fitted to vector autoregressive models, and tested for Granger causality in the time domain. Results showed that 1) at baseline, changes in BP and MCAv often interact in a closed-loop; and 2) α1-adrenergic blockade results in the dominant causal direction from BP to MCAv. These results suggest that, between subjects, cerebral pressure-flow interactions at time scales < 0.07 Hz are frequently bidirectional, and that in the presence of an intact autonomic nervous system BP may be regulated by reflex pathways sensitive to changes in CBF.
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".