MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4303418913 · doi:10.1113/ep090563

Control of blood pressure in the cold: differentiation of skin and skeletal muscle vascular resistance

2022· article· en· W4303418913 on OpenAlexaff
Hendrik Mugele, Kyohei Marume, Sachin B. Amin, Carmen Possnig, Lucie C. Kühn, Lydia Riehl, Robin Pieper, Eva‐Lotte Schabbehard, Samuel J. Oliver, Daniel Gagnon, Justin S. Lawley

Bibliographic record

VenueExperimental Physiology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicThermoregulation and physiological responses
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalMontreal Heart Institute
FundersWilderness Medical Society
KeywordsVasoconstrictionVascular resistanceForearmSkeletal muscleBlood pressureMedicineBrachial arteryClampInternal medicineCardiologyAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

NEW FINDINGS: What is the central question of this study? Why does blood pressure increases during cold air exposure? Specifically, what is the contribution of skin and skeletal muscle vascular resistance during whole body versus isolated face cooling? What is the main finding and its importance? Whole-body cooling caused an increase in blood pressure through an increase in skeletal muscle and cutaneous vascular resistance. However, isolated mild face cooling caused an increase in blood pressure predominately via an increase in cutaneous vasoconstriction. ABSTRACT: The primary aim of this investigation was to determine the individual contribution of the cutaneous and skeletal muscle circulations to the cold-induced pressor response. To address this, we examined local vascular resistances in the cutaneous and skeletal muscle of the arm and leg. Thirty-four healthy individuals underwent three different protocols, whereby cold air to clamp skin temperature (27°C) was passed over (1) the whole-body, (2) the whole-body, but with the forearm pre-cooled to clamp cutaneous vascular resistance, and (3) the face. Cold exposure applied to the whole body or isolated to the face increased mean arterial pressure (all, P < 0.001) and total peripheral resistance (all, P < 0.047) compared to thermal neutral baseline. Whole-body cooling increased femoral (P < 0.005) and brachial artery resistance (P < 0.003) compared to thermoneutral baseline. Moreover, when the forearm was pre-cooled to remove the contribution of cutaneous resistance (P = 0.991), there was a further increase in lower arm vasoconstriction (P = 0.036) when whole-body cooling was superimposed. Face cooling also caused a reflex increase in lower arm cutaneous (P = 0.009) and brachial resistance (P = 0.050), yet there was no change in femoral resistance (P = 0.815) despite a reflex increase in leg cutaneous resistance (P = 0.010). Cold stress causes an increase in blood pressure through a change in total peripheral resistance that is largely due to cutaneous vasoconstriction with face cooling, but there is additional vasoconstriction in the skeletal muscle vasculature with whole-body cooling.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.927
Threshold uncertainty score0.310

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations21
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExperimental PhysiologySame topicThermoregulation and physiological responsesFrench-language works237,207