MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The effect of sex on sympathetic transduction during an acute pain stimulus

2023· article· en· W4378675002 on OpenAlexaffabout
Yasmine Coovadia, Laila A Chaudhry, Graham Fraser, Charlotte W. Usselman

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysiology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHeart Rate Variability and Autonomic Control
Canadian institutionsNewfoundland and Labrador Centre for Applied Health ResearchMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicroneurographySupine positionBlood pressureMedicineStimulus (psychology)Internal medicinePhotoplethysmogramBeat (acoustics)Cold pressor testCardiologyAnesthesiaHeart rateBaroreflexPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Previously, we have noted sex differences in beat-by-beat fluctuations in blood pressure following sequences of muscle sympathetic nerve activity (MSNA; i.e. sympathetic transduction) during acute sympatho-inhibition but not at rest. However, sex differences in sympathetic transduction during sympatho-excitation have yet to be examined. Therefore, we tested the hypothesis that sympathetic transduction during acute sympatho-excitation and recovery from sympatho-excitation are greater in men than women. We tested healthy women (n=5) and men (n=5) of similar age (26±4 vs 23±2y, respectively; P=0.3). Integrated MSNA (microneurography; NeuroAmp, ADInstruments) and beat-by-beat blood pressure (finger photoplethysmography; Finometer MIDI) were assessed during 10 minutes of supine rest, an acute pain stimulus (6-minute cold pressor test; CPT), and recovery (6-minutes). Custom software was used to calculate sympathetic transduction: beat-by-beat changes in mean arterial pressure (MAP) were tracked for 15 subsequent cardiac cycles (expressed relative to the cardiac cycle associated with the final burst or non-burst in the sequence). Like sequences were overlaid and averaged. Prevailing MSNA and MAP were not different between women and men at rest (9±8 vs 8±5 bursts/min, P=0.8; 88±6 vs 97±6 mmHg, P=0.06) or during the CPT (21±10 vs 16±6 bursts/min, P=0.3; 98±5 vs 104±6 mmHg, P=0.1). However, during recovery, MSNA was greater in women than men (21±8 vs 10±4 bursts/min, P=0.03), despite similar MAP (95±5 vs 99±6 mmHg, P=0.3). Peak and nadir changes in sympathetic transduction following burst and non-burst sequences were not different between women and men at rest (burst: 1.55±0.46 vs 1.67±0.27mmHg, P=0.6; non-burst: -2.21±1.88 vs -2.26±0.36mmHg, P=0.9) or during the CPT (burst: 1.06±0.32 vs 0.45±0.47mmHg, P=0.08; non-burst: -3.24±1.44 vs 1.90±0.46mmHg, P=0.1). Sympathetic transduction following a burst of MSNA did not differ between the sexes during recovery (1.73±0.34 vs 1.65±0.23mmHg, P=0.7), while nadir decreases in MAP following non-burst sequences during recovery were more pronounced in women than men (-2.81±0.75 vs -1.56±0.91mmHg, P=0.04). Taken together, although sympathetic transduction did not differ between the sexes during the CPT, these data suggest that women may require heightened MSNA during recovery from acute stress to maintain equivalent blood pressure. This project was funded by McGill University, FRQS, and NSERC. This is the full abstract presented at the American Physiology Summit 2023 meeting and is only available in HTML format. There are no additional versions or additional content available for this abstract. Physiology was not involved in the peer review process.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.309
Threshold uncertainty score0.185

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.261 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysiologySame topicHeart Rate Variability and Autonomic ControlFrench-language works237,207