The impact of a cold pressor test on brachial artery handgrip exercise-induced flow-mediated dilation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is unknown how endothelial-dependent flow-mediated dilation (FMD) stimulated by a sustained, exercise-induced increase in shear stress (EX-FMD) is affected by a simultaneous sympathoexcitatory painful stimulus. The purpose of this study was to examine the impact of a cold pressor test (CPT) on brachial artery EX-FMD elicited by a handgrip exercise-induced increase in shear stress. Participants were healthy males (age 21±2 years) (n=28; 16 Experimental group, 12 Control). Brachial artery diameter and blood velocity were measured using echo and Doppler ultrasound, respectively. Shear stress was estimated by shear rate (shear rate = blood velocity / diameter) and targeted to reach 75 s(-1) in each of two EX-FMD trials in all subjects. In the Experimental group, the second EX-FMD trial was accompanied by simultaneous foot immersion in ice water (simultaneous CPT). The shear rate stimulus did not differ between groups (p=0.823) or trials (p=0.726) (group × trial interaction: p=0.646) (average exercise shear rate (mean ± SD): 67.6±6.2 s(-1)). The CPT (experienced during EX-FMD trial 2 in the Experimental group) increased mean arterial pressure (p<0.001) and heart rate (p=0.002) relative to the Control group. %EX-FMD was not different between groups (p=0.508) or trials (p=0.592) (group × trial interaction: p=0.879) (EX-FMD: Experimental group trial 1: 5.4±3.4%, trial 2: 5.6±2.6%; Control group trial 1: 6.0±3.7%, trial 2: 6.4±2.2%). In conclusion, the CPT did not impact concurrent EX-FMD, and this indicates that an acute painful stimulus does not interfere with conduit artery FMD responses during exercise in young healthy men.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".