MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Venous emptying mediates a transient vasodilation in the human forearm

2000· article· en· W60917739 on OpenAlexaff
Michael E. Tschakovsky, Richard L. Hughson

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Physiology-Heart and Circulatory Physiology · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicThermoregulation and physiological responses
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsForearmVasodilationTransient (computer programming)MedicineCardiologyInternal medicineAnesthesiaAnatomyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We tested the hypothesis that venous emptying serves as a stimulus for vasodilation in the human forearm. We compared the forearm blood flow (FBF; pulsed Doppler mean blood velocity and echo Doppler brachial artery diameter) response to temporary elevation of a resting forearm from below to above heart level when venous volume was allowed to drain versus when venous drainage was prevented by inflation of an upper arm cuff to approximately 30 mmHg. Arm elevation resulted in a rapid reduction in venous volume and pressure. Cuff inflation just before elevation effectively prevented these changes. FBF was briefly reduced by approximately 16% following arm elevation. A transient (86%) increase in blood flow began by approximately 5 s of arm elevation and peaked by 8 s, indicating a vasodilation. This response was completely abolished by preventing venous emptying. Arterial inflow below heart level was markedly elevated by 343% following brief (4 s) forearm elevation. This hyperemia was minor when venous emptying during forearm elevation had been prevented. We conclude that venous emptying serves as a stimulus for a transient (within 10 s) vasodilation in vivo. This vasodilation can substantially elevate arterial inflow.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.992
Threshold uncertainty score0.446

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations44
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Physiology-Heart and Circulatory PhysiologySame topicThermoregulation and physiological responsesFrench-language works237,207