MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Stimulus Control Minimizes the Impact of Baseline Diameter on the Endothelial Dependent Dilation Response

2004· article· en· W4230035727 on OpenAlexaff
Kyra E. Pyke, Erin M. Dwyer, Michael E. Tschakovsky

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAngiogenesis and VEGF in Cancer
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBrachial arteryStimulus (psychology)MedicineReactive hyperemiaCardiologyForearmVasodilationInternal medicineSurgeryPsychologyBlood pressure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

2026 Non-invasive tests to quantify endothelium dependent flow-mediated dilation (EDFMD) have important clinical and basic research applications. With the current EDFMD test which employs reactive hyperemia (RH) as a shear stress stimulus, both the peak stimulus and the peak response vary inversely with the subject's baseline brachial artery diameter (BAD). PURPOSE: To create a uniform stimulus in all subjects regardless of baseline diameter and determine the relationship between baseline diameter and peak response compared with the RH test (RHT). METHODS: BAD and mean blood velocity (MBV) were measured with Doppler ultrasound in 8 healthy subjects. RHT: transient, uncontrolled shear rate (SR) stimulus (estimate of shear stress; SR = MBV/BAD) created via release of 5 min of forearm occlusion. Controlled hyperemia test (CHT): precise, maintained target SR stimulus created by controlled release of brachial artery compression upstream of heat-induced forearm vasodilation. 2 trials of each test were performed on 3 separate days. RESULTS: The CHT SR stimulus was on target and maintained for 5 min. The between subjects CV for the shear rate stimulus in the CHT was only 4.87% vs. 36.61% in the RHT. Thus the CHT was successful in creating a uniform stimulus between subjects. Subjects demonstrated a range of brachial artery diameters (3.35–5.19 mm) and the RHT showed an inverse relationship between baseline diameter and both the shear rate stimulus and the dilation response (slope = 1.05, r2 = 0.47, P < 0.001 and slope = −4.75, r2 = 0.64, P < 0.01 respectively). Conversely, the CHT showed no relationship between baseline diameter and the shear rate stimulus(slope = −1.02, r2 = 0.018, P = 0.36) and only a very small relationship between baseline diameter and the peak response (slope = − 0.77, r2 = 0.14, P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Controlling the shear rate stimulus virtually eliminates the relationship of baseline diameter to the EDFMD response. This will facilitate the comparison of EDFMD sensitivity in groups with significantly different diameters e.g. men vs. women. Supported by NSERC; CFI New Opportunities Fund

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0040.001

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.278 · 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

Citations0
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicine & Science in Sports & ExerciseSame topicAngiogenesis and VEGF in CancerFrench-language works237,207