Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 71

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Inspiratory muscles during exercise: a problem of supply and demand

Leblanc, P., Summers, E., Inman, M. D., Jones, N. L., Campbell, E. J., Killian, K. J.·1988·Journal of Applied Physiology

Abstract

The capacity of inspiratory muscles to generate esophageal pressure at several lung volumes from functional residual capacity (FRC) to total lung capacity (TLC) and several flow rates from zero to maximal flow was measured in five normal subjects. Static capacity was 126 +/- 14.6 cmH2O at FRC, remained unchanged between 30 and 55% TLC, and decreased to 40 +/- 6.8 cmH2O at TLC. Dynamic capacity declined by a further 5.0 +/- 0.35% from the static pressure at any given lung volume for every liter per second increase in inspiratory flow. The subjects underwent progressive incremental exercise to maximum power and achieved 1,800 +/- 45 kpm/min and maximum O2 uptake of 3,518 +/- 222 ml/min. During exercise peak esophageal pressure increased from 9.4 +/- 1.81 to 38.2 +/- 5.70 cmH2O and end-inspiratory esophageal pressure increased from 7.8 +/- 0.52 to 22.5 +/- 2.03 cmH2O from rest to maximum exercise. Because the estimated capacity available to meet these demands is critically dependent on end-inspiratory lung volume, the changes in lung volume during exercise were measured in three of the subjects using He dilution. End-expiratory volume was 52.3 +/- 2.42% TLC at rest and 38.5 +/- 0.79% TLC at maximum exercise.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1152/jappl.1988.64.6.2482

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Leblanc, P., Summers, E., Inman, M. D., Jones, N. L., Campbell, E. J., & Killian, K. J.
Affiliations
Department of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Venue
Journal of Applied Physiology
Published
1988-06-01
Volume
64
Issue
6
Pages
2482-2489
ISSN
  • 8750-7587
  • 1522-1601
Cited by
71
References
0
Language
en

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.