Restoring brain connectivity by phrenic nerve stimulation in sedated and mechanically ventilated patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In critically ill patients, deep sedation and mechanical ventilation suppress the brain-diaphragm-lung axis and are associated with cognitive issues in survivors. METHODS: This exploratory crossover design study investigates whether phrenic nerve stimulation can enhance brain activity and connectivity in six deeply sedated, mechanically ventilated patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome. RESULTS: Our findings indicate that adding phrenic stimulation on top of invasive mechanical ventilation in deeply sedated, critically ill, moderate acute respiratory distress syndrome patients increases cortical activity, connectivity, and synchronization in the frontal-temporal-parietal cortices. CONCLUSIONS: Adding phrenic stimulation on top of invasive mechanical ventilation in deeply sedated, critically ill, moderate acute respiratory distress syndrome patients increases cortical activity, connectivity, and synchronization. The observed changes resemble those during diaphragmatic breathing in awake humans. These results suggest that phrenic nerve stimulation has the potential to restore the brain-diaphragm-lung crosstalk when it has been shut down or impaired by mechanical ventilation and sedation. Further research should evaluate the clinical significance of these results.
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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".