P.066 Cortical autonomic patterns in Neurogenic Orthostatic Hypotension
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Neurogenic orthostatic hypotension (NOH), defined as a drop in systolic blood pressure (SBP) ≥30mmHg on standing or head-up tilt, is associated with autonomic dysfunction. The cortical autonomic network (CAN) is a network of brain regions associated with autonomic function. Our aim was to investigate CAN activation patterns in NOH patients during autonomic testing. Methods: Fifteen controls (61±14 years) and 13 NOH patients (68±6 years;p=0.1) completed: 1)Deep Breathing (DB), 2)Valsalva maneuver (VM) and 3)Lower-body negative pressure (LBNP) during a functional MRI. Blood-oxygen level dependent (BOLD) contrasts were obtained and contrasted. Results: Compared to controls (C), patients (NOH) had significantly smaller heart rate (HR) responses to DB (C:15.3±9.6 vs.NOH:6.0±2.2) and VR’s (C:2.1±0.47 vs.NOH:1.2±0.1;p<0.001). Patients had larger SBP drops during LBNP (C: -22.3±6 vs.NOH: -61±22) with -significantly smaller compensatory tachycardias (19±8.5 vs.7.6±4.3)(p<0.001). BOLD response: During VM, controls had greater activation in the right (R) hippocampus (T-value:7.34), left (L) posterior cingulate (T-value:7.22) bilateral mid-cingulate (TR-value:5.76; TL-value:6.84) and bilateral thalamus (TR-value:7.23, TL-value:8.16)(pFWE<0.001). Following subtraction analysis, brain activation patterns showed no significant differences in the regions of interest in response to DB and LBNP. Conclusions: During tests of autonomic function, NOH patient had different cortical activation patterns during VM only. Cortical activation pattern during DB and LBNP showed similar patterns to that of controls.
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) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
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".