Neural Control of the Upper Airway: Integrative Physiological Mechanisms and Relevance for Sleep Disordered Breathing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The various neural mechanisms affecting the control of the upper airway muscles are discussed in this review, with particular emphasis on structure‐function relationships and integrative physiological motor‐control processes. Particular foci of attention include the respiratory function of the upper airway muscles, and the various reflex mechanisms underlying their control, specifically the reflex responses to changes in airway pressure, reflexes from pulmonary receptors, chemoreceptor and baroreceptor reflexes, and postural effects on upper airway motor control. This article also addresses the determinants of upper airway collapsibility and the influence of neural drive to the upper airway muscles, and the influence of common drugs such as ethanol, sedative hypnotics, and opioids on upper airway motor control. In addition to an examination of these basic physiological mechanisms, consideration is given throughout this review as to how these mechanisms relate to integrative function in the intact normal upper airway in wakefulness and sleep, and how they may be involved in the pathogenesis of clinical problems such obstructive sleep apnea hypopnea. © 2012 American Physiological Society. Compr Physiol 2:479‐535, 2012.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".