MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Dynamic cerebral autoregulation of the posterior cerebral artery after high level spinal cord injury

2013· article· en· W3165968380 on OpenAlexaff
Aaron A. Phillips, Andrei V. Krassioukov, Philip N. Ainslie, Yu‐Chieh Tzeng, Darren E. R. Warburton

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular Disturbances
Canadian institutionsInterior HealthUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusKelowna General HospitalUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCerebral autoregulationTranscranial DopplerMiddle cerebral arteryMedicineCerebral arteriesCerebral blood flowAnesthesiaPhotoplethysmogramAnterior cerebral arteryBlood pressurePosterior cerebral arteryCerebral circulationSpinal cord injuryCardiologyBasilar arteryAutoregulationSpinal cordInternal medicineIschemia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It has been reported that those with high level (e.g., >; T 5 ) spinal cord injury (HLSCI) can tolerate profound hypotension in the absence of syncopal symptoms. Altered dynamic cerebral autoregulation (dCA) may help maintain cerebral blood flow (CBF) and improve tolerance to hypotension. In HLSCI, dCA of the posterior cerebral artery (PCA), which is relevant to syncopal episodes due to its supply arising from arteries perfusing the brainstem (i.e., critical region for maintaining consciousness), has not been investigated. Eight complete HLSCI and eight matched controls (AB) were examined in the upright position. Five‐minute long recordings of spontaneously occurring beat‐to‐beat changes in blood pressure (BP; photoplethysmography) as well as velocity in the middle cerebral artery (MCA) and PCA (transcranial Doppler) were recorded. To provide insight into dCA, transfer function analysis was performed to evaluate coherence, gain and phase of the MCA and PCA in the very low (0.02–0.07 Hz) and low (0.07–0.2 Hz) frequency ranges. In HLSCI, BP‐MCAv coherence was reduced by 33% in both the LF and VLF range, while VLF phase was reduced by 63% ( P < 0.05). Similarly, BP‐PCAv coherence was reduced by 48% in the LF and 54% in the VLF range ( P < 0.01). These results show that CBF regulation is altered in both the MCA and PCA in those with HLSCI.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB Journal→Same topicTraumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular Disturbances→French-language works237,207→