Faculty Opinions recommendation of Intermittent hypoxia training for treating mild cognitive impairment: A pilot study.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although intermittent hypoxia training (IHT) has proven effective against various clinical disorders, its impact on mild cognitive impairment (MCI) is unknown. This pilot study examined IHT's safety and therapeutic efficacy in elderly patients with amnestic MCI (aMCI). Seven patients with aMCI (age 69 ± 3 years) alternately breathed 10% O2 and room-air, each 5 minutes, for 8 cycles/session, 3 sessions/wk for 8 weeks. The patients' resting arterial pressures fell by 5 to 7 mm Hg (P < .05) and cerebral tissue oxygenation increased (P < .05) following IHT. Intermittent hypoxia training enhanced hypoxemia-induced cerebral vasodilation (P < .05) and improved mini-mental state examination and digit span scores from 25.7 ± 0.4 to 27.7 ± 0.6 (P = .038) and from 24.7 ± 1.2 to 26.1 ± 1.3 (P = .047), respectively. California verbal learning test score tended to increase (P = .102), but trail making test-B and controlled oral word association test scores were unchanged. Adaptation to moderate IHT may enhance cerebral oxygenation and hypoxia-induced cerebrovasodilation while improving short-term memory and attention in elderly patients with aMCI. PMID: 31902230
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.039 | 0.004 |
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".