MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Greater Postexercise Hypotension in Trained Individuals Following Prolonged Exercise in the Heat

2010· article· en· W1976931262 on OpenAlexaff
Daniel Gagnon, Aaron Lynn, Konrad Binder, Glen P. Kenny

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular and exercise physiology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFluid replacementMedicineCardiac outputPeripheralHyperthermiaCardiologyCore temperatureHeart rateInternal medicineAnesthesiaVasodilationHemodynamicsBlood pressure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Postexercise hypotension in untrained (U) individuals is due to a sustained peripheral vasodilation which is not offset by increases in cardiac output (Q). In contrast, trained (T) individuals demonstrate a reduced Q while total peripheral resistance (TPR) is unchanged. However, it has recently been shown that both fluid replacement and mild hyperthermia maintain elevated levels of postexercise Q in T. Yet, it is unknown if this response differs between U and T. PURPOSE: To compare differences in mean arterial pressure (MAP) between U and T following prolonged exercise in the heat, with and without fluid replacement. METHODS: In a thermal chamber maintained at 42°C, 3 U (VO2max = 50.0±8.0 ml/kg/min) and 3 T (VO2max = 72.7±12 ml/kg/min) performed 120min of cycling exercise at a fixed external workload of 120 W followed by 90min of recovery. Exercise was performed with (Fluid) and without (Control) water consumption. MAP and Q were measured every 10min postexercise and used to calculate TPR. Esophageal temperature (Tes) was recorded continuously. RESULTS: Control decreased body weight by 3.0±0.8 and 4.7±2.4 %, whereas Fluid maintained body weight within 0.5±0.5 and 0.7±0.6 % for U and T respectively. End-exercise Tes was greater following Control (U: 38.8±0.4°C, T: 39.1±0.6°C, p=0.213) compared to Fluid (U: 38.1±0.3°C, T: 38.0±0.6°C, p=0.730). Although MAP was reduced below baseline levels in both U and T following Control, there was a trend for MAP to be lower in T at 60 (86±14 mmHg vs. 76±11 mmHg, p=0.069) and 90min (87±13 mmHg vs. 76±10 mmHg, p=0.072). There were no differences in Q at either 60 (U: 6.1±0.5 L/min, T: 5.9±0.6 L/min, p=0.792) or 90min (U: 6.2±0.8 L/min, T: 6.0±0.1 L/min, p=0.765). Although not statistically different, the lower MAP in T appears to be due to a lower TPR at 60 (U: 14.2±3.0 L/min/mmHg, T: 12.7±3.2 L/min/mmHg, p=0.262) and 90min (U: 14.1±2.6 L/min/mmHg, T: 12.5±2.3 L/min/mmHg, p=0.196). No differences in MAP, Q and TPR were observed between groups following Fluid. CONCLUSION: Trained individuals have a more pronounced postexercise hypotension compared to untrained individuals following combined hyperthermia and dehydration. Preliminary data suggest that this greater postexercise hypotension is due to a more pronounced peripheral vasodilation. Funding support: NSERC grant held by Dr. G.P. Kenny.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise→Same topicCardiovascular and exercise physiology→French-language works237,207→