MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2018278710 · doi:10.1097/mbp.0b013e32835136fa

Effects of isometric handgrip training on blood pressure (resting and 24 h ambulatory) and heart rate variability in medicated hypertensive patients

2012· article· en· W2018278710 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

VenueBlood Pressure Monitoring · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHeart Rate Variability and Autonomic Control
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicineAmbulatoryIsometric exerciseBlood pressureCardiologyAmbulatory blood pressureHeart rateInternal medicineHeart rate variabilityPhysical therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: Isometric handgrip (IHG) training (four, 2-min sustained contractions at 30% of maximal voluntary contraction, three times per week for 8-10 weeks) lowers resting arterial blood pressure (BP) in hypertensive patients, including those receiving pharmacotherapy, although the mechanisms remain elusive. Ambulatory BP measurements are more efficacious in predicting cardiovascular disease-related events, yet the effects of IHG training on ambulatory BP are unknown. The objective of the current investigation was to test the hypotheses that 8 weeks of IHG training lowers resting and 24 h ambulatory BP concomitantly in medicated hypertensive patients, and may be the result of improved vagal modulation. METHODS: BP was assessed using brachial artery oscillometry, and coarse-graining spectral analysis was used to determine spectral power. Resting and 24 h ambulatory BP and heart rate variability (HRV) were measured pretraining, midtraining, and post-training in 11 medicated hypertensive patients (mean ± SD, resting BP: 113.9 ± 12.7/60.7 ± 11.6 mmHg), and in nine medicated hypertensive controls (resting BP: 117.8 ± 14.3/67.5 ± 4.2 mmHg). RESULTS: Indices of BP and HRV were not significantly altered with IHG training (all P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: IHG training does not lower resting or ambulatory BP in hypertensive patients successfully treated with pharmacotherapy to within the normal range (≤ 120/80 mmHg), nor does it improve HRV. Future studies should examine alternative IHG training protocols in well-managed hypertensive patients and/or target poorly controlled medicated hypertensive patients.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.090
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.222 · 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