MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3006978939 · doi:10.1113/ep088192

Cerebrovascular reactivity to carbon dioxide is not influenced by variability in the ventilatory sensitivity to carbon dioxide

2020· article· en· W3006978939 on OpenAlex
Connor A. Howe, Hannah G. Caldwell, Jay M. J. R. Carr, Daniela Nowak‐Flück, Philip N. Ainslie, Ryan L. Hoiland

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueExperimental Physiology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular Disturbances
Canadian institutionsVancouver General HospitalUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsHyperventilationCerebral blood flowVentilation (architecture)AnesthesiaCarbon dioxideMedicineRespiratory minute volumeContext (archaeology)HemodynamicsCerebral perfusion pressureArterial bloodInternal medicineRespiratory systemChemistryBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

New Findings What is the central question of this study? Do differing magnitudes of ventilation influence cerebrovascular CO 2 reactivity and the cerebral blood flow response to increases in arterial carbon dioxide? What is the main finding and its importance? While a greater ventilation, through voluntary hyperventilation, is associated with a higher anterior cerebral blood flow during carbon dioxide breathing, this elevated cerebral blood flow is due to a higher blood pressure and not ventilation per se . A greater ventilation, through voluntary hyperventilation, does not influence global or posterior cerebral blood flow during carbon dioxide breathing. Cerebrovascular reactivity to carbon dioxide is not influenced by an individual's ventilatory sensitivity to carbon dioxide. Abstract Recent work demonstrated an influence of ventilation on cerebrovascular reactivity to CO 2 ; however, the concomitant influence of changes in mean arterial blood pressure (MAP) on ventilation‐induced differences in cerebral blood flow (CBF) has yet to be examined in this context. Healthy participants ( n = 15; 25 ± 3 years of age; 179 ± 6 cm height; 74 ± 10 kg weight; 3 female) underwent end‐tidal forcing to increase their partial pressure of end‐tidal CO 2 by +3, +6 and +9 mmHg above baseline in 5‐min sequential steps while maintaining iso‐oxia. This protocol was then repeated twice, with participants hyperventilating and hypoventilating by ∼30% compared to the first trial. Intra‐cranial and extra‐cranial CBF were measured using ultrasound. The MAP (finger photo‐plethysmography) was higher during the hyperventilation and hypoventilation trials compared to normal ventilation (main effects, P < 0.05 for both). While internal carotid artery blood flow was higher during the hyperventilation trial compared to normal ventilation ( P = 0.01), this was due to a higher MAP, as indicated by analysis of conductance values ( P = 0.68) or inclusion of MAP in covariate analysis ( P = 0.11). Global CBF ( P = 0.11) and vertebral artery blood flow ( P = 0.93) were unaffected by the magnitude of ventilation. Further, CO 2 reactivity was not affected by the different breathing trials ( P > 0.05 for all). Retrospective analysis of a larger data set ( n = 53) confirmed these observations and demonstrated no relationships between the ventilatory and global CBF response to hypercapnia ( r 2 = 0.04; P = 0.14). Therefore, when differences in MAP are accounted for, cerebrovascular CO 2 reactivity (assessed via end‐tidal forcing) is independent of the magnitude of ventilation.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.251
Threshold uncertainty score0.988

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.255 · 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