Effect of Aging on Muscle-Pump Baroreflex of Individual Leg Muscles During Standing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Activation of leg muscles is an important component in the regulation of blood pressure during standing, failure of which could result in syncope and falls. Our previous work demonstrated baroreflex mediated activation of leg muscles (muscle-pump baroreflex) as an important factor in the regulation of blood pressure during standing; however, the effect of aging on the muscle-pump baroreflex of individual leg muscles during standing remains to be understood. Here, the interaction between systolic blood pressure (SBP) and the activation of lateral gastrocnemius (LG), medial gastrocnemius (MG), tibialis anterior (TA), and soleus (SOL) muscles during standing was quantified. Beat-to-beat heart period (RR interval), SBP, electromyography impulse (EMGimp) were derived from continuously acquired electrocardiography, finger blood pressure, and calf-electromyography, respectively. The cardiac baroreflex (SBP→RR) causality (0.88±0.08 vs 0.94±0.03, p=0.01), percent time with significant coherence (%SC: 50.95±23.31 vs 76.75±16.91, p=0.001), and gain (4.39±4.38 vs 13.06±8.11, p<0.001) was lower in older (69±4 years) compared to young (26±2 years) persons. Muscle-pump baroreflex (SBP→EMGimp) causality of LG (0.81±0.05 vs 0.88±0.08, p=0.01) and SOL (0.79±0.11 vs 0.88±0.04, p=0.01) muscles was lower in older compared to young persons. %SC was lower for all muscles in the older group (LG, p<0.001; MG, p=0.01; TA, p=0.01; and SOL, p<0.001) compared to young. The study outcomes highlighted impairment in muscle-pump baroreflex with age in addition to cardiac baroreflex. The findings of the study can assist in the development of an effective system for monitoring orthostatic tolerance via cardiac and muscle-pump baroreflexes to mitigate syncope and falls.
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) | 0.001 | 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".