Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21694763›Full record

ArticlePloS one2011

Statistical coding and decoding of heartbeat intervals.

Fausto Lucena, Allan Kardec Barros, José C Príncipe, Noboru Ohnishi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Fausto LucenaBiological Information Engineering Laboratory, Nagoya University, Nagoya, Aichi, Japan. lucena@ohnishi.nagoya-u.ac.jp
Allan Kardec Barros
José C Príncipe
Noboru Ohnishi

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The heart integrates neuroregulatory messages into specific bands of frequency, such that the overall amplitude spectrum of the cardiac output reflects the variations of the autonomic nervous system. This modulatory mechanism seems to be well adjusted to the unpredictability of the cardiac demand, maintaining a proper cardiac regulation. A longstanding theory holds that biological organisms facing an ever-changing environment are likely to evolve adaptive mechanisms to extract essential features in order to adjust their behavior. The key question, however, has been to understand how the neural circuitry self-organizes these feature detectors to select behaviorally relevant information. Previous studies in computational perception suggest that a neural population enhances information that is important for survival by minimizing the statistical redundancy of the stimuli. Herein we investigate whether the cardiac system makes use of a redundancy reduction strategy to regulate the cardiac rhythm. Based on a network of neural filters optimized to code heartbeat intervals, we learn a population code that maximizes the information across the neural ensemble. The emerging population code displays filter tuning proprieties whose characteristics explain diverse aspects of the autonomic cardiac regulation, such as the compromise between fast and slow cardiac responses. We show that the filters yield responses that are quantitatively similar to observed heart rate responses during direct sympathetic or parasympathetic nerve stimulation. Our findings suggest that the heart decodes autonomic stimuli according to information theory principles analogous to how perceptual cues are encoded by sensory systems.

Indexed as

Models, CardiovascularModels, StatisticalAdultAgedAnimalsElectrocardiographyFemaleHeart RateHumansMaleMiddle AgedRabbitsTime Factors

Identifiers

PMID21694763
PMCPMC3111410

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.