MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2945174178 · doi:10.1113/jp277714

Blunted sympathetic neurovascular transduction during normotensive pregnancy

2019· article· en· W2945174178 on OpenAlexafffund
Craig D. Steinback, Graham Fraser, Charlotte W. Usselman, Laura M. Reyes, Colleen G. Julian, Michael K. Stickland, Radha Chari, Rshmi Khurana, Sandra T. Davidge, Margie H. Davenport

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Physiology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHeart Rate Variability and Autonomic Control
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of NewfoundlandWomen and Children’s Health Research InstituteUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research ChairsGovernment of CanadaHeart and Stroke Foundation of Canada
KeywordsNeurovascular bundlePregnancyInternal medicineTransduction (biophysics)MedicineEndocrinologyCardiologyNeuroscienceAnatomyBiologyBiophysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

KEY POINTS: Normotensive pregnancy is associated with elevated sympathetic nervous system activity yet normal or reduced blood pressure. It represents a unique period of apparent healthy sympathetic hyperactivity. The present study models the blood pressure and heart rate (ECG R-R interval) responses to fluctuations in sympathetic nervous system activity aiming to understand neurocardiovascular transduction. The reported data clearly demonstrate that transduction of sympathetic nervous system signalling to systemic cardiovascular outcomes is reduced in normotensive pregnancy. These data are important for understanding how blood pressure regulation adapts during normotensive pregnancy and set the foundation for exploring similar mechanisms in hypertensive pregnancies. ABSTRACT: Previously, we described sympathetic nervous system hyperactivity yet decreased blood pressure responses to stress in normotensive pregnancy. To address the hypothesis that pregnant women have blunted neurocardiovascular transduction we assessed the relationship between spontaneous bursts of sympathetic nerve activity (SNA) and fluctuations in mean arterial blood pressure and R-R interval. Resting SNA, blood pressure and ECG were obtained in pregnant (third trimester, n = 18) and non-pregnant (n = 18) women matched for age and pre-/non-pregnant body mass index. Custom software modelled beat-by-beat pressure (photoplethysmography) and R-R interval in relation to sequences of SNA bursts and non-bursts (peroneal microneurography). Sequences were grouped by the number of bursts and non-bursts [singlets, doublets, triplets and quadruplet (four or more)] and mean blood pressure and R-R interval were tracked for 15 subsequent cardiac cycles. Similar sequences were overlaid and averaged. Peak mean pressure in relation to sequences of SNA was reduced in pregnant vs. non-pregnant women (doublets: 1.6 ± 1.1 mmHg vs. 3.6 ± 3.1 mmHg, P < 0.05; triplets: 2.4 ± 1.2 mmHg vs. 3.4 ± 2.1 mmHg, P < 0.05; quadruplets: 3.0 ± 1.0 mmHg vs. 5.5 ± 3.7 mmHg, P < 0.05). The nadir R-R interval following burst sequences was also smaller in pregnant vs. non-pregnant women (singlets: -0.01 ± 0.01 s vs. -0.04 ± 0.04 s, P < 0.05; doublets: -0.02 ± 0.03 s vs. -0.05 ± 0.04 s, P < 0.05; triplets: -0.02 ± 0.01 s vs. -0.07 ± 0.04 s, P < 0.05; quadruplets: -0.01 ± 0.01 s vs. -0.09 ± 0.09 s, P < 0.05). There were no differences between groups in the mean arterial pressure and R-R interval responses to non-burst sequences. Our data clearly indicate blunted systemic neurocardiovascular transduction during normotensive pregnancy. We propose that blunted transduction is a positive adaptation protecting pregnant women from the cardiovascular consequences of sympathetic hyperactivity.

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 score0.002

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.212 · 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

Citations47
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of PhysiologySame topicHeart Rate Variability and Autonomic ControlFrench-language works237,207