A randomized double-blind, placebo-controlled, cross-over trial assessing the effect of tadalafil (Cialis) on the cardiovascular response in men with complete spinal cord injury above the sixth thoracic level: A Pilot Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN: Double-blind, randomized cross-over placebo-controlled pilot study. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effects of tadalafil on systolic blood pressure (SBP), heart rate (HR), and dizziness of men with American Spinal Injury Association Impairment Scale-A (AIS-A) spinal cord injury (SCI) between cervical-4 (C4) and thoracic-5 (T5) levels. SETTING: Outpatient rehabilitation clinic. DESIGN: Double-blind, randomized cross-over placebo-controlled pilot study. METHODS: 20 males with AIS-A SCI, C4-T5 received either tadalafil 20 mg or placebo for the first arm, and then were crossed-over after 1 week to the second arm. SBP, HR, and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) for dizziness upon sitting up from lying were measured at baseline and again 1, 2, 4, 12, 22, 29, and 36 h post dose administration. The change in each outcome measure (SBP, HR, VAS dizziness) was observed from pre-dose to each time point. A change in VAS dizziness of 2 cm or greater (scale 0-10 cm) was considered positive. RESULTS: <0.05), with no change in the placebo group. The VAS dizziness significantly increased (range 2-6 cm changes) at some time point in 1/4 of the subjects after tadalafil, but not in the placebo group; all reports of dizziness were at 12 h or later. CONCLUSIONS: Tadalafil use in people with SCI above T6 is safe with respect to not causing hypotension; hemodynamic changes that occurred 12-36 h post administration were compensated for by elevations in HR. SPONSORSHIP: The Manitoba Medical Services Foundation and the Health Sciences Centre Foundation.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".