Effects of Low-Intensity Exercise Conditioning on Blood Pressure, Heart Rate, and Autonomic Modulation of Heart Rate in Men and Women with Hypertension
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Untreated hypertension increases cardiovascular risk 2-fold to 3-fold, leading to serious cardiovascular problems that include left ventricular hypertrophy, stroke, ischemic heart disease, myocardial infarction, vascular disease, renal disease, and death. Exercise conditioning is recommended as one of the initial treatments for hypertension. The purpose of this pretest-posttest study was to quantify the effects of a 12-week home-based low-intensity exercise conditioning (walking) program in hypertensive men and women on systolic and diastolic blood pressure, heart rate, and autonomic modulation of heart rate. A total of 20 mildly hypertensive men and women who were assigned to a structured exercise (walking) program were compared with a control group of 20 nonexercising mildly hypertensive participants. Electrocardiographic heart rate and R-R interval data and beat-by-beat arterial blood pressure data were collected continuously for 10 min with participants in the supine and standing postures and during low-intensity steady-state exercise. The results show that systolic and diastolic blood pressure and R-R interval decreased and spontaneous baroreflex sensitivity increased in the exercise group. The decline in blood pressure was significant statistically and clinically. The increase in spontaneous baroreflex sensitivity indicates that the ability of the cardiovascular system to respond rapidly to changing stimuli improved after the 12-week walking protocol. The low-intensity exercise conditioning program achieved a training effect in this population.
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) | 0.001 | 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".