Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41637319›Full record

ReviewArquivos brasileiros de cardiologia2025

I - Evaluation of Cardiovascular Autonomic Function in Healthy Individuals.

Benedito Carlos Maciel, Lourenço Gallo-Jr, André Schmidt, José Antonio Marin-Neto

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Benedito Carlos MacielLaboratório de Hemodinâmica e Cardiologia Intervencionista, Hospital das Clínicas, Faculdade de Medicina de Ribeirão Preto, USP, São Paulo, SP - Brasil.ORCID 0000-0002-3456-8433
Lourenço Gallo-JrLaboratório de Hemodinâmica e Cardiologia Intervencionista, Hospital das Clínicas, Faculdade de Medicina de Ribeirão Preto, USP, São Paulo, SP - Brasil.ORCID 0000-0001-6952-9031
André SchmidtLaboratório de Hemodinâmica e Cardiologia Intervencionista, Hospital das Clínicas, Faculdade de Medicina de Ribeirão Preto, USP, São Paulo, SP - Brasil.ORCID 0000-0002-1090-8165
José Antonio Marin-NetoLaboratório de Hemodinâmica e Cardiologia Intervencionista, Hospital das Clínicas, Faculdade de Medicina de Ribeirão Preto, USP, São Paulo, SP - Brasil.ORCID 0000-0002-8651-8833

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This first part of the review presents nearly 60 years of experience from our laboratory in standardizing cardiovascular autonomic tests in healthy individuals. The wide range of tests includes pharmacological blockade of both the sympathetic and parasympathetic divisions, baroreflex sensitivity assessment through transient hypertension and hypotension, the Valsalva maneuver, head-up tilt testing, isometric and dynamic exercise, facial immersion in cold water, respiratory sinus arrhythmia, heart rate variability analysis in the frequency domain, and imaging with 123I-metaiodobenzylguanidine. Autonomic function was evaluated based on test responses under baseline conditions in healthy individuals. The analysis also covers physiological adaptations to endurance training and aging, providing a reference framework for identifying autonomic dysfunction involving both parasympathetic and adrenergic components in patients with various pathophysiological conditions, as discussed in the second part of this review.

Indexed as

Autonomic Nervous SystemCardiovascular Physiological PhenomenaCardiovascular SystemBaroreflexHeart RateHumansReference ValuesValsalva Maneuver

Identifiers

PMID41637319
PMCPMC12978363

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.