Do we have the guts to go? The abdominal compartment, intra-abdominal hypertension, the human microbiome and exploration class space missions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Humans are destined to explore space, yet critical illness and injury may be catastrophically limiting for extraterrestrial travel. Humans are superorganisms living in symbiosis with their microbiomes, whose genetic diversity dwarfs that of humans. Symbiosis is critical and imbalances are associated with disease, occurring within hours of serious illness and injury. There are many characteristics of space flight that negatively influence the microbiome, especially deep space itself, with its increased radiation and absence of gravity. Prolonged weightlessness causes many physiologic changes that are detrimental; some resemble aging and will adversely affect the ability to tolerate critical illness or injury and subsequent treatment. Critical illness-induced intra-abdominal hypertension (IAH) may induce malperfusion of both the viscera and microbiome, with potentially catastrophic effects. Evidence from animal models confirms profound IAH effects on the gut, namely ischemia and disruption of barrier function, mechanistically linking IAH to resultant organ dysfunction. Therefore, a pathologic dysbiome, space-induced immune dysfunction and a diminished cardiorespiratory reserve with exacerbated susceptibility to IAH, imply that a space-deconditioned astronaut will be vulnerable to IAH-induced gut malperfusion. This sets the stage for severe gut ischemia and massive biomediator generation in an astronaut with reduced cardiorespiratory/immunological capacity. Fortunately, experiments in weightless analogue environments suggest that IAH may be ameliorated by conformational abdominal wall changes and a resetting of thoracoabdominal mechanics. Thus, review of the interactions of physiologic changes with prolonged weightlessness and IAH is required to identify appropriate questions for planning exploration class space surgical care.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".