Visceral fat enhances blood pressure reactivity to physical but not mental challenges in male adolescents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Excess visceral fat is a major risk factor for hypertension. Enhanced blood pressure (BP) reactivity and delayed BP recovery from physical and mental challenges predict future hypertension. OBJECTIVES: Determine whether visceral fat is associated with higher BP reactivity and delayed BP recovery from physical and mental challenges during adolescence. METHODS: In a community-based sample of 283 male and 308 female adolescents, we measured visceral fat with magnetic resonance imaging, total body fat with bioimpedance, and beat-by-beat BP with a Finometer at rest and during physical (10-min standing) and mental (2-min math stress) challenges. RESULTS: Males vs. females showed greater BP reactivity and no differences in BP recovery from either type of challenges. Visceral fat was positively associated with BP reactivity to standing up only and in males only (+8.4 ± 3.6 mmHg per 1 log cm(3) of visceral fat, P = 0.008), and this association was independent of total body fat. No association was seen between visceral fat and BP recovery from either type of challenge in either sex. All these associations were independent of age, puberty stage, height and initial BP. CONCLUSIONS: Adolescent males vs. females demonstrate greater BP reactivity but similar BP recovery from physical and mental challenges. Excess visceral fat enhances BP reactivity to physical but not mental challenges in males only.
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) | 0.000 | 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".