MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1922733984 · doi:10.1113/jphysiol.2014.285965

Oxygen cost of exercise hyperpnoea is greater in women compared with men

2015· article· en· W1922733984 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Physiology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular and exercise physiology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsVentilation (architecture)Work of breathingBreathingVO2 maxOxygenIncremental exerciseRespiratory minute volumeMedicineTidal volumeBreathing gasPhysical therapyRespiratory systemCardiologyAnesthesiaInternal medicineHeart rateBlood pressureChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

KEY POINTS: The oxygen cost of breathing represents a significant fraction of total oxygen uptake during intense exercise. At a given ventilation, women have a greater work of breathing compared with men, and because work is linearly related to oxygen uptake we hypothesized that their oxygen cost of breathing would also be greater. For a given ventilation, women had a greater absolute oxygen cost of breathing, and this represented a greater fraction of total oxygen uptake. Regardless of sex, those who developed expiratory flow limitation had a greater oxygen cost of breathing at maximal exercise. The greater oxygen cost of breathing in women indicates that a greater fraction of total oxygen uptake (and possibly cardiac output) is directed to the respiratory muscles, which may influence blood flow distribution during exercise. ABSTRACT: We compared the oxygen cost of breathing (V̇O2 RM ) in healthy men and women over a wide range of exercise ventilations (V̇E). Eighteen subjects (nine women) completed 4 days of testing. First, a step-wise maximal cycle exercise test was completed for the assessment of spontaneous breathing patterns. Next, subjects were familiarized with the voluntary hyperpnoea protocol used to estimate V̇O2 RM . During the final two visits, subjects mimicked multiple times (four to six) the breathing patterns associated with five or six different exercise stages. Each trial lasted 5 min, and on-line pressure-volume and flow-volume loops were superimposed on target loops obtained during exercise to replicate the work of breathing accurately. At ∼55 l min(-1) V̇E, V̇O2 RM was significantly greater in women. At maximal ventilation, the absolute V̇O2 RM was not different (P > 0.05) between the sexes, but represented a significantly greater fraction of whole-body V̇O2 in women (13.8 ± 1.5 vs. 9.4 ± 1.1% V̇O2). During heavy exercise at 92 and 100% V̇O2max, the unit cost of V̇E was +0.7 and +1.1 ml O2 l(-1) greater in women (P < 0.05). At V̇O2max, men and women who developed expiratory flow limitation had a significantly greater V̇O2 RM than those who did not (435 ± 44 vs. 331 ± 30 ml O2 min(-1) ). In conclusion, women have a greater V̇O2 RM for a given V̇E, and this represents a greater fraction of whole-body V̇O2. The greater V̇O2 RM in women may have implications for the integrated physiological response to exercise.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.827
Threshold uncertainty score0.264

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.233 · 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