Acid–base balance and cerebrovascular regulation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The regulation and defence of intracellular pH is essential for homeostasis. Indeed, alterations in cerebrovascular acid–base balance directly affect cerebral blood flow (CBF) which has implications for human health and disease. For example, changes in CBF regulation during acid–base disturbances are evident in conditions such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and diabetic ketoacidosis. The classic experimental studies from the past 75+ years are utilized to describe the integrative relationships between CBF, carbon dioxide tension ( P CO 2 ), bicarbonate (HCO 3 – ) and pH. These factors interact to influence (1) the time course of acid–base compensatory changes and the respective cerebrovascular responses (due to rapid exchange kinetics between arterial blood, extracellular fluid and intracellular brain tissue). We propose that alterations in arterial [HCO 3 – ] during acute respiratory acidosis/alkalosis contribute to cerebrovascular acid–base regulation; and (2) the regulation of CBF by direct changes in arterial vs . extravascular/interstitial P CO 2 and pH – the latter recognized as the proximal compartment which alters vascular smooth muscle cell regulation of CBF. Taken together, these results substantiate two key ideas: first, that the regulation of CBF is affected by the severity of metabolic/respiratory disturbances, including the extent of partial/full acid–base compensation; and second, that the regulation of CBF is independent of arterial pH and that diffusion of CO 2 across the blood–brain barrier is integral to altering perivascular extracellular pH. Overall, by realizing the integrative relationships between CBF, P CO 2 , HCO 3 – and pH, experimental studies may provide insights to improve CBF regulation in clinical practice with treatment of systemic acid–base disorders. image
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".