Brachial artery flow-mediated dilation is not affected by pregnancy or regular exercise participation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Whether brachial artery FMD (flow-mediated dilation) is altered in pregnancy by 28-35 weeks compared with non-pregnant women remains controversial. The controversy may be due to limitations of previous studies that include failing to: (i) test non-pregnant controls in the mid-late luteal phase, (ii) account for effects of pregnancy on the dilatory shear stimulus, (iii) account for physical activity or (iv) control for inter-individual variation in the time to peak FMD. In the present study, brachial artery FMD was measured in 17 active and eight sedentary pregnant women (34.1±1.6 weeks of gestation), and in 19 active and 11 sedentary non-pregnant women (mid-late luteal phase). Decreased vascular tone secondary to increased shear stress contributes minimally to pregnancy-induced increases in baseline brachial artery diameter, as shear stress removal during distal cuff inflation in pregnant women did not reduce diameter to baseline levels observed in non-pregnant controls. Neither the shear stimulus nor the percentage FMD was affected by pregnancy or regular exercise. Continuous diameter measurements are required to control for delayed peak dilation during pregnancy (57±15 compared with 46±15 s; P=0.012), as post-release diameter measured at 60 or 55-65 s post-release underestimated FMD to a greater extent in non-pregnant than in pregnant women.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".