Cardiac function and posttraumatic stress disorder: a review of the literature and case report
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) can induce an elevation in sympathetic tone; however, research pertaining to the cardiac cycle in patients with PTSD is limited. METHODS: A literature review was conducted with PubMed, MEDLINE and Web of Science. Articles discussing changes and associations in echocardiography and PTSD or related symptoms were synthesized for the current review. We have also included data from a case report of a male participant aged 33 years experiencing potentially psychologically traumatic events, who wore a noninvasive cardiac sensor to assess the timing intervals and contractility parameters of the cardiac cycle using seismocardiography. The intervals included systolic time, isovolumic contraction time (IVCT) and isovolumic relaxation time (IVRT). Calculations of systolic (IVCT/systole), diastolic (IVRT/systole) and myocardial [(IVCT+IVRT)/systole] performance indices were completed. RESULTS: The review identified 55 articles, 14 of which assessed cardiac function using echocardiography in patients with PTSD symptoms. Cardiac dysfunction varied across studies, with diastolic and systolic impairments found in patients with PTSD. Our case study showed that occupational stress elevated cardiac performance indices, suggesting increased ventricular stress and supporting results in the existing literature. CONCLUSIONS: The literature review results suggest that a controlled approach to assessing cardiac function in patients with PTSD is required. The case study results further suggest that acute bouts of stress can alter cardiac function, with potential for sustained occupational stress to induce changes in cardiac function. Cardiac monitoring can be used prospectively to identify changes induced by potentially psychologically traumatic event exposures that can lead to the development of PTSD symptoms.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.011 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".