A prospective cohort study about the effect of repeated living high and working higher on cerebral autoregulation in unacclimatized lowlanders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cerebral autoregulation (CA) is impaired during acute high-altitude (HA) exposure, however, effects of temporarily living high and working higher on CA require further investigation. In 18 healthy lowlanders (11 women), we hypothesized that the cerebral autoregulation index (ARI) assessed by the percentage change in middle cerebral artery peak blood velocity (Δ%MCAv)/percentage change in mean arterial blood pressure (Δ%MAP) induced by a sit-to-stand maneuver, is (i) reduced on Day1 at 5050 m compared to 520 m, (ii) is improved after 6 days at 5050 m, and (iii) is less impaired during re-exposure to 5050 m after 7 days at 520 m compared to Cycle1. Participants spent 4-8 h/day at 5050 m and slept at 2900 m similar to real-life working shifts. High/low ARI indicate impaired/intact CA, respectively. With the sit-to-stand at 520 m, mean (95% CI) in ΔMAP and ΔMCAv were - 26% (- 41 to - 10) and - 13% (- 19 to - 7), P < 0.001 both comparisons; mean ± SD in ARI was 0.58 ± 2.44Δ%/Δ%, respectively. On Day1 at 5050 m, ARI worsened compared to 520 m (3.29 ± 2.42Δ%/Δ%), P = 0.006 but improved with acclimatization (1.44 ± 2.43Δ%/Δ%, P = 0.039). ARI was less affected during re-exposure to 5050 m (1.22 ± 2.52Δ%/Δ%, P = 0.027 altitude-induced change between sojourns). This study showed that CA (i) is impaired during acute HA exposure, (ii) improves with living high, working higher and (iii) is ameliorated during re-exposure to HA.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".