Time-domain methods for quantifying dynamic cerebral blood flow autoregulation: Review and recommendations. A white paper from the Cerebrovascular Research Network (CARNet)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cerebral Autoregulation (CA) is an important physiological mechanism stabilizing cerebral blood flow (CBF) in response to changes in cerebral perfusion pressure (CPP). By maintaining an adequate, relatively constant supply of blood flow, CA plays a critical role in brain function. Quantifying CA under different physiological and pathological states is crucial for understanding its implications. This knowledge may serve as a foundation for informed clinical decision-making, particularly in cases where CA may become impaired. The quantification of CA functionality typically involves constructing models that capture the relationship between CPP (or arterial blood pressure) and experimental measures of CBF. Besides describing normal CA function, these models provide a means to detect possible deviations from the latter. In this context, a recent white paper from the Cerebrovascular Research Network focused on Transfer Function Analysis (TFA), which obtains frequency domain estimates of dynamic CA. In the present paper, we consider the use of time-domain techniques as an alternative approach. Due to their increased flexibility, time-domain methods enable the mitigation of measurement/physiological noise and the incorporation of nonlinearities and time variations in CA dynamics. Here, we provide practical recommendations and guidelines to support researchers and clinicians in effectively utilizing these techniques to study CA.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.004 |
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".