MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3120579312

Normal and Elevated Blood CO2 Increased Anterior Blood Flow Responses During the Cold Pressor Test

2018· article· en· W3120579312 on OpenAlexaff
Brittney Herrington, LM Mann, SF Thrall, TA Day

Bibliographic record

VenueURSCA Proceedings · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular Disturbances
Canadian institutionsMount Royal University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHypocapniaNormocapniaTranscranial DopplerMiddle cerebral arteryAnesthesiaHypercapniaCerebral blood flowMedicineBlood pressureCerebral arteriesBlood flowCold pressor testCardiologyInternal medicineHeart rateIschemiaAcidosis
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The cerebrovasculature is responsive to acute alterations in blood gases (e.g., CO2) and blood pressure. The brain is relatively pressure passive, with acute increases in mean arterial pressure (MAP) driving increases in cerebral blood flow (CBF). The superimposition of dynamic increases in MAP and controlled CO2 perturbations on the regulation of anterior and posterior cerebral circulation is unclear. We aimed to characterize the effects of cold pressor test (CPT) on the anterior and posterior (middle and posterior cerebral arteries; MCA, PCA) with a background of different steady-state CO2 perturbations. Seventeen healthy participants were instrumented with electrocardiogram, finometer, mouthpiece/noseclip, and transcranial Doppler ultrasound (TCD) for measurement of MCA and PCA velocity (MCAv, PCAv). End-tidal CO2 was measured using calibrated CO2 analyzer. In a randomized order, a CPT was administered using 0-2°C water immersion of the lower limbs for 3-min under three coached, normoxic, steady-state end-tidal PCO2 conditions: normocapnia (eupnea), hypocapnia (-10 Torr) and hypercapnia (+8 Torr). The CBV responses were calculated as the absolute difference (∆) between baseline and the mean MCAv and PCAv during the 3-min CPT. The ∆MCAv response was larger in the hypercapnic trial compared to normocapnia and hypocapnia (P<0.05), but there were no differences in the ∆PCAv. The ∆MCAv CPT response was larger than the ∆PCAv during the hypercapnic trial (P<0.001) as well as the normocapnic trial (P=0.017), but there were no differences between ∆MCAv vs. ∆PCAv in the hypocapnic trials. Our data demonstrate that there was differential regional permissive hyperemia when acute increases in MAP and steady-state CO2 are superimposed. Funding Sources: NSERC Discovery, MRU Faculty of Science and Technology. *Indicates presenter

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.308
Threshold uncertainty score0.647

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueURSCA ProceedingsSame topicTraumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular DisturbancesFrench-language works237,207