MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411398465 · doi:10.1097/md.0000000000042692

The role of heart rate variability in acute mountain sickness: A meta-analysis

2025· review· en· W4411398465 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Tung‐Yao Tsai, Jun-Xian Lin, Ju‐Chi Ou, Ting-Yun Huang

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHeart Rate Variability and Autonomic Control
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineConfidence intervalHeart rate variabilityMeta-analysisInternal medicineStandard deviationMean differencePooled varianceStrictly standardized mean differenceEffects of high altitude on humansCardiologyPhysical therapyHeart rateStatisticsBlood pressure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Acute mountain sickness (AMS) is associated with symptoms arising from an individual's failure to acclimatize to high-altitude environments characterized by hypobaric hypoxia. Heart rate variability (HRV) has been proposed as a potential predictor of AMS, but results from individual studies have been inconsistent. Therefore, this study investigated HRV before and after ascent to provide a more comprehensive review of the relationship between HRV and AMS. METHODS: We conducted a systematic search of MEDLINE, PubMed, and Google Scholar from inception to August 2023. Studies measuring HRV in relation to AMS were included. The quality of studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. RESULTS: Initially, 153 trials were identified through our search strategy. Seven studies met the inclusion criteria, comprising a total of 329 participants. Before ascent, individuals who developed AMS showed significantly higher percentage of successive R-R intervals that differ by more than 50 ms compared with those who did not develop AMS (standardized mean difference = 0.40, 95% confidence interval: [0.11 to 0.69]). After ascent, the AMS group exhibited significantly lower standard deviation of normal-to-normal R-R intervals (standardized mean difference = -0.41, 95% confidence interval: [-0.69 to -0.13]). Other HRV parameters, including low-frequency and high-frequency power, showed trends toward lower values in the AMS group but did not reach statistical significance. CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis proves that certain HRV parameters, particularly percentage of successive R-R intervals that differ by more than 50 ms before ascent and standard deviation of normal-to-normal R-R intervals after ascent, may be associated with AMS development. These findings suggest that HRV analysis could potentially be used as a tool for predicting and monitoring AMS. However, further research is needed to establish definitive clinical guidelines.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.060

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0110.033
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.044
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.317 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicineSame topicHeart Rate Variability and Autonomic ControlFrench-language works237,207