Trial reportEuropean journal of applied physiology2016
The arterial baroreflex and inherent G tolerance.
Trial report in European journal of applied physiology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- A century of anti-G straining maneuvers. Are there further changes in AGSM physical training that can improve +Gz tolerance? A scoping review.Frontiers in physiology · 2026Review
- From G tolerance to physiological state monitoring: mechanisms and adaptive protection.Frontiers in physiology · 2026Review
- Computational modelling of cardiovascular pathophysiology to risk stratify commercial spaceflight.Nature reviews. Cardiology · 2024Review
- Repetitive high-sustained gravitoinertial stress does not modulate pressure responsiveness to peripheral sympathetic stimulation.European journal of applied physiology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeHigh G tolerance is based on the capacity to maintain a sufficient level of arterial pressure (AP) during G load; therefore, we hypothesized that subjects with high G tolerance (H group) would have stronger arterial baroreflex responses compared to subjects with low G tolerance (L group). The carotid baroreflex was evaluated using the neck pressure method (NP), which assesses open-loop responses.
methodsThe carotid baroreflex was tested in 16 subjects, n = 8 in the H and L group, respectively, in the supine and upright posture. Heart rate and AP were measured.
resultsThere were no differences between groups in the maximum slopes of the carotid baroreflex curves. However, the H group had a larger systolic and mean AP (SAP, MAP) increase to the initial hypotensive stimuli of the NP sequence in the upright position compared to the L group, 7.5 ± 6.6 vs 2.0 ± 2.4 and 4.1 ± 3.4 vs 1.1 ± 1.1 mmHg for SAP and MAP, respectively. Furthermore, the L group exhibited an increased latency between stimuli and response in AP in the upright compared to supine position, 4.1 ± 1.0 vs 3.1 ± 0.9 and 4.7 ± 1.1 vs 3.6 ± 0.9 s, for SAP and MAP. No differences in chronotropic responses were observed between the groups.
conclusionsIt is concluded that the capacity for reflexive vasoconstriction and maintained speed of the vascular baroreflex during orthostatic stress are coupled to a higher relaxed GOR tolerance.
Indexed as
Identifiers
27072546What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.