Effect of age on the hemodynamic and sympathetic responses at the onset of isometric handgrip exercise
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cardiac and peripheral vasomotor factors contribute to the rapid pressor response at the onset of isometric handgrip exercise. We tested the hypothesis that age enhances the sympathetic and vasoconstrictor response at the onset of isometric handgrip exercise so that the pressor response is maintained, despite a diminished cardiac function. Twelve young and twelve older (24 ± 3 and 63 ± 8 yr) individuals performed 20-s isometric handgrip exercise at 30, 40, or 50% of maximal voluntary contraction force. Muscle sympathetic nerve activity (MSNA) was measured using microneurography. Mean arterial pressure (MAP) and cardiac output (Q) were assessed continuously by finger plethysmography and total peripheral resistance was calculated. MAP increased with the onset of handgrip; this increase was associated with handgrip intensity and was similar in both groups. Heart rate and Q increased with increasing handgrip intensity in both groups, but increases were greater in young vs. older individuals (age × handgrip intensity interaction, P < 0.05). MSNA burst frequency increased (P < 0.01), while MSNA burst incidence tended to increase (P = 0.06) with increasing handgrip intensity in both groups. The change in MSNA between baseline and handgrip, for both frequency and incidence, increased with increasing handgrip intensity for both groups. There was no effect of handgrip intensity or age on total peripheral resistance. The smaller heart rate and Q response during the first 20 s of handgrip exercise in older individuals was not accompanied by a greater sympathetic activation or vasoconstrictor response. However, increases in MAP were similar between groups, indicating that the pressor response at the onset of handgrip exercise is preserved with aging.
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".