Heterogeneous motor BOLD-fMRI responses in brain areas exhibiting negative BOLD cerebrovascular reactivity indicate that steal phenomenon does not always result from exhausted cerebrovascular reserve capacity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Brain areas exhibiting negative blood oxygenation-level dependent cerebrovascular reactivity (BOLD-CVR) responses to carbon dioxide (CO2) are thought to suffer from a completely exhausted autoregulatory cerebrovascular reserve capacity and exhibit vascular steal phenomenon. If this assumption is correct, the presence of vascular steal phenomenon should subsequently result in an equal negative fMRI signal response during a motor-task based BOLD-fMRI study (increase in metabolism without an increase in cerebral blood flow due to exhausted reserve capacity) in otherwise functional brain tissue. To investigate this premise, the aim of this study was to further investigate motor-task based BOLD-fMRI signal responses in brain areas exhibiting negative BOLD-CVR. Seventy-one datasets of patients with cerebrovascular steno-occlusive disease without motor defects, who underwent a CO2-calibrated motor task-based BOLD-fMRI study with a fingertapping paradigm and a subsequent BOLD-CVR study with a precisely controlled CO2-challenge during the same MRI examination, were included. We compared BOLD-fMRI signal responses in the bilateral pre- and postcentral gyri – i.e. Region of Interest (ROI) with the corresponding BOLD-CVR in this ROI. The ROI was determined using a second level group analysis of the BOLD-fMRI task study of 42 healthy individuals undergoing the same study protocol. An overall decrease in BOLD-CVR was associated with a decrease in BOLD-fMRI signal response within the ROI. For patients exhibiting negative BOLD-CVR, we found both positive and negative motor-task based BOLD-fMRI signal responses. We show that the presence of negative BOLD-CVR responses to CO2 is associated with heterogeneous motor task-based BOLD-fMRI signal responses, where some patients show -more presumed- negative BOLD-fMRI signal responses, while other patient showed positive BOLD-fMRI signal responses. This finding may indicate that the autoregulatory vasodilatory reserve capacity does not always need to be completely exhausted for vascular steal phenomenon to occur.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".