MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4308772646 · doi:10.1152/ajpheart.00261.2022

Common carotid artery responses to the cold-pressor test are impaired in individuals with cervical spinal cord injury

2022· article· en· W4308772646 on OpenAlexafffund
Zoe K. Sarafis, Jordan W. Squair, Otto Barak, Geoff B. Coombs, Jan Elaine Soriano, Kelly A. Larkin-Kaiser, Amanda H. X. Lee, Alexander B. Hansen, Maro Vodopić, Rinaldo Romac, Christopher J. Grant, Rebecca Charbonneau, Tanja Mijačika, Andrei V. Krassioukov, Philip N. Ainslie, Željko Dujić, Aaron A. Phillips

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Physiology-Heart and Circulatory Physiology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHeart Rate Variability and Autonomic Control
Canadian institutionsGF Strong Rehabilitation CentreOkanagan University CollegeLibin Cardiovascular Institute of AlbertaUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of British ColumbiaInternational Collaboration On Repair DiscoveriesUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan Campus
FundersPraxis Precision MedicinesLibin Cardiovascular Institute, University of CalgaryNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaWings for LifeCanada Research ChairsCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchAlliance de recherche numérique du Canada
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineCardiologyCommon carotid arteryCold pressor testBlood pressureSpinal cord injuryCoronary artery diseaseContractilityPopulationHeart rateAnesthesiaSpinal cordCarotid arteries

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This is the first study demonstrating that CCA responses during CPT are suppressed in SCI. Specifically, CCA diameter, flow, velocity, and shear rate were reduced. The relationship between changes in MAP and CCA dilatation in response to CPT was absent in individuals with SCI, despite similar cardiovascular activation between SCI and uninjured controls. These findings support the notion of elevated cardiovascular disease risk in SCI and that the cardiovascular responses to environmental stimuli are impaired.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.865
Threshold uncertainty score0.677

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.259 · 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 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

Citations5
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Physiology-Heart and Circulatory PhysiologySame topicHeart Rate Variability and Autonomic ControlFrench-language works237,207