Combined strength and endurance training does not improve left ventricular systolic function in response to a high‐intensity exercise in females (881.7)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The acute effect of high‐intensity exercise combined with strength and endurance training on left ventricular (LV) systolic function in female rowers is not well known. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effects of 10‐weeks of endurance and strength training on maximal oxygen uptake (VO2max), endurance performance, strength, and LV morphology and systolic function in eight female rowers (mean age: 25 ± 9 years). LV systolic function was also assessed before and immediately after completing a high‐intensity endurance performance test (2000m of rowing). Ten‐weeks of combined strength and endurance training significantly improved VO2max (before vs. after; 2.7 ± 0.4 vs. 3.0 ± 0.3 L/min), endurance performance time (510 ± 41 vs. 491 ± 24 sec), leg press (163 ± 45 vs. 235 ± 86 kg) and bench press (40 ± 4 vs. 46 ± 5 kg) one repetition maximum strength. Combined training did not change end‐diastolic cavity area (19 ± 3 vs. 19 ± 4 cm2), end‐systolic cavity area (9 ± 2 vs. 8 ± 2 cm2), fractional area change (51 ± 6 vs. 55 ± 3%) or mass (160 ± 34 vs. 159 ± 17 g). High‐intensity exercise was associated with an increase in contractility and fractional area change from before to after training. In conclusion, 10 weeks of rowing and strength training in female rowers improves exercise capacity, endurance performance and muscle strength without altering LV morphology. In addition, combined strength and endurance training was not associated with an increase in LV systolic function but contractility and fractional area was significantly increased with high intensity exercise. Grant Funding Source : Supported by the Sport Science Association of Alberta
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".