Cardiovascular response to anticipatory and reactionary postural perturbations in young adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
NEW FINDINGS: What is the central question of this study? It has been suggested that the cardiovascular responses to a postural perturbation are centrally mediated and reflex mediated. We wanted to know the extent to which the cardiovascular responses to external perturbations could be executed in a feedforward manner, in anticipation of the perturbation. What is the main finding and its importance? We found no anticipatory component driving heart rate and systolic blood pressure responses, suggesting that reflexive mechanisms dominate cardiovascular regulation after a postural perturbation in young adults. ABSTRACT: Cardiovascular responses to postural perturbations have been reported, but whether the cardiovascular responses to external perturbations could be executed in anticipation of the perturbation is unknown. The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of anticipated and reactionary perturbations on heart rate (HR) and systolic blood pressure (SBP) responses in healthy young adults. A secondary aim was to determine whether perceived state anxiety scores were correlated with the change in HR response during postural perturbation. Twenty healthy young adults stood on a treadmill and experienced two perturbation conditions (anticipatory vs. reactionary), each with two intensity levels (Step vs. No Step). The HR and SBP were collected continuously. Two-way repeated-measures statistical non-parametric mapping tests were used to compare HR and SBP responses to the perturbations over time (from -3 to +8 s). The results indicated that HR was significantly elevated in the higher intensity perturbations [Step vs. No Step, at 0.56-1.32 s (P < 0.0001) and 1.92-3.44 s (P < 0.0001) post-perturbation], while there were no differences in HR between perturbation types (anticipatory vs. reactionary) or in SBP between perturbation types and intensity levels. The perceived state anxiety scores did not differ between perturbation types and intensity levels but were correlated with the change in HR post-perturbation (P = 0.013). We suggest that reflexive mechanisms dominate cardiovascular regulation after anticipatory and reactionary perturbations. The data highlight the cardiovascular mechanism(s) associated with perturbations that should be considered when assessing postural stability in populations with poor balance performance.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".