ReviewFrontiers in physiology2026
Aerospace stressors and brain health in military aviators: a glymphatic-neurovascular framework.
Review in Frontiers in physiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Military aviation exposes aircrew to interacting physiological and operational stressors that are often studied in isolation. These stressors are experienced by the whole body: pulmonary, cardiovascular, musculoskeletal, endocrine, and immune responses may influence cerebral perfusion, blood-brain barrier function, fatigue, and recovery. Evidence from aviation cohorts, altitude-chamber studies, and adjacent fields suggests that some exposures may converge on neurovascular, blood-brain barrier, perivascular, and inflammatory pathways before overt neurological disease is apparent. This narrative review evaluates the glymphatic system as one potentially important component of that broader injury-and-recovery network, rather than as a sole or established primary mechanism. We synthesize evidence concerning hypobaria and decompression, intermittent hypoxia and hyperoxia, high +Gz, sleep and circadian disruption, operational wakefulness-promoting agents, noise, cosmic ionizing radiation, and context-dependent chemical exposures. Direct human evidence of glymphatic dysfunction in tactical aviators remains absent, and findings from lower-intensity hypobaric exposure and retrospective clinical cohorts are mixed or null. Exposure profiles also differ substantially among fighter, cargo/tanker, helicopter, and remotely piloted aircraft communities. We therefore propose an exposure-resolved research agenda combining longitudinal neuroimaging, circulating biomarkers, electroencephalography, cognitive testing, sleep phenotyping, dosimetry, and controlled single- and combined-stressor experiments. This calibrated glymphatic-neurovascular framework generates testable hypotheses about cumulative brain stress and recovery while preserving alternative explanations involving direct tissue injury, cerebral perfusion, endothelial dysfunction, oxidative stress, systemic and central inflammation, and autonomic regulation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.