Heart rate variability in pulmonary hypertension with and without sleep apnea
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Our aims were to evaluate HRV in pulmonary hypertension (WHO Group 1 and 4) compared to control subjects, and to assess whether the presence of sleep apnea in those with pulmonary hypertension would be deleterious and cause greater impairment in HRV. METHODS: This retrospective case-control study analyzed electrocardiogram segments obtained from diagnostic polysomnography. RESULTS: Forty-one pulmonary hypertension patients were compared to 41 age, sex and apnea-hypopnea index matched healthy controls. The pulmonary hypertension group had decreased high frequency, very low frequency, low frequency, and percentage of normal R-R intervals that differ by > 50 ms compared to control subjects. Moderate to severe right ventricle dysfunction on echocardiography was a predictor of lower high frequency in pulmonary hypertension patients. CONCLUSIONS: There were no differences in any HRV measures in pulmonary hypertension patients with or without sleep apnea. Impaired HRV was demonstrated in pulmonary hypertension patients however, the presence of sleep apnea did not appear to further reduce vagal modulation.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".