MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

The endothelial responses to low‐ and high‐intensity cycling with diesel exhaust exposure (1106.21)

2014· article· en· W1559448956 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Luisa V. Giles, Normand Richard, Jian Ruan, Scott J. Tebbutt, Christopher Carlsten, Michael S. Koehle

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAir Quality and Health Impacts
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaHealth CanadaCanadian Academy of Sport and Exercise Medicine
KeywordsCyclingMedicineExercise intensityInternal medicineEndotheliumNitriteCardiologyAnimal scienceChemistryNitrateHeart rateBlood pressureBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Outdoor exercisers are frequently exposed to air pollution. How the endothelium responds to exercise in air pollution, and how these responses change with exercise intensity is unknown. The purpose of this study was to determine the endothelial responses to low‐ and high‐intensity cycling with diesel exhaust (DE) exposure. Eighteen males aged 24.56.2 yrs performed 30‐minute trials of low (30% of power at VO 2peak ) and high‐intensity (60% of power at VO 2peak ) cycling, and rest. For each subject, each trial was performed once breathing filtered air (FA) and once breathing DE (300ug/m 3 of PM 2.5 ) for a total of six trials, each separated by 7‐days. Prior to, immediately following, and 1 hour, and 2 hours post‐exposure flow‐mediated dilation (FMD), plasma nitrite/nitrate (NOx), intercellular adhesion molecule (ICAM)‐1, and vascular cell adhesion molecule (VCAM)‐1 were measured. Data were analyzed using repeated‐measures ANOVA. There were no main or interaction effects for FMD. DE exposure did not affect plasma VCAM‐1. Compared to the FA exposure, DE led to lower ICAM‐1 levels following high‐intensity exercise (p<0.05), while plasma NOx was increased (p<0.05). DE exposure does not differentially affect FMD post‐exercise, yet there are significant differences in key biomarkers that warrant further investigation. Grant Funding Source : Supported by: CASEM, Health Canada, the Fraser Basin Council, NSERC

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.243 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB Journal→Same topicAir Quality and Health Impacts→French-language works237,207→