Ethnic Differences in Vascular Responses to Aerobic Exercise
Bibliographic record
Abstract
UNLABELLED: Indigenous populations currently experience greater rates of cardiovascular disease. Although ethnic differences in cardiovascular responses to exercise have previously been identified, these responses among indigenous populations are unknown. PURPOSE: This investigation aimed to evaluate the vascular responses to aerobic exercise of Canadian indigenous and European adults. METHODS: Twelve age- and sex-matched indigenous and European adults completed a cycle ergometer maximal aerobic power test and submaximal 30 min of 60% maximal aerobic capacity on two separate days. Blood pressure, pulse wave velocity, baroreceptor sensitivity, arterial compliance, vascular resistance, and intima-media thickness were directly measured before and after aerobic exercises. RESULTS: Vascular responses to exercise were generally similar between indigenous and European adults including decreases in baroreceptor sensitivity and vascular resistance after maximal exercise. No changes in intima-media thickness, pulse wave velocity, and arterial compliance were observed after exercise in either group. However, after submaximal exercise, only European adults demonstrated reductions in baroreceptor sensitivity (spectral: 9.2 ± 4.3 to 11.5 ± 6.7 ms·mm Hg, P = 0.41, vs 15.8 ± 8.3 m·s to 8.9 ± 5.7 ms·mm Hg, P = 0.02; sequence: 14.6 ± 5.4 to 16.5 ± 11.0 ms·mm Hg, P = 0.48, vs 26.2 ± 10.5 m·s to 15.4 ± 9.4 ms·mm Hg, P = 0.02). Similarly, decreases in blood pressure after exercise were observed only among European adults. CONCLUSIONS: Indigenous adults demonstrated vascular responses similar to those demonstrated by European adults, although blood pressure was only observed to decrease among European adults after maximal and submaximal exercise, and baroreceptor sensitivity, after submaximal 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.
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) | 0.003 | 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".