MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Heart Rate Variability Is Not A Predictor Of Orthostatic Intolerance In Healthy Young Women

2009· article· en· W2057537224 on OpenAlexaff
Anita T. Coté, Shannon S. D. Bredin, Shirley C. Wong, Darren E. R. Warburton

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHeart Rate Variability and Autonomic Control
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHypovolemiaMedicineHeart rate variabilityOrthostatic intoleranceOrthostatic vital signsInternal medicineHeart rateCardiologyBlood pressureTilt table testPhysical therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Various predictors of orthostatic tolerance have been proposed in the literature including gender, height, and training status. More recently, haemodynamic predictors have also been shown to predict tolerance to Lower Body Negative Pressure (LBNP), an effective means of inducing central hypovolemia. However, the literature is not conclusive, suggesting other factors also play a role in the mechanisms responsible for orthostatic intolerance. Heart rate variability (HRV) is thought to be a good index of autonomic control. Studies to date have shown women to have enhanced parasympathetic input to cardiac regulation compared to age-controlled men. It is possible that difference in autonomic balance (HRV) may explain (in part) the increased presence of orthostatic intolerance in women. PURPOSE: Therefore, the purpose of this investigation was to test whether HRV varied between orthostatic and intolerant women. METHODS: Eleven healthy college-age women (Age = 24± 3 (SD) yr) participated in a testing session involving two 12-minute baseline collection periods (pre- and post-LBNP) and four 12-minute stages of progressive LBNP at -15, -30, -45 and -60 mm Hg. Five of the eleven (45%) women became pre-syncopal in the last stage of LBNP (low tolerance = LT). The remaining 6 women were classified with high tolerance (HT). RESULTS: No significant differences existed between HT and LT for any of the measured HVR variables: total power (TP), high frequency (HF), low frequency (LF), LF/HF ratio, SDNN, or RMSSD. Resting LF/HF ratios were comparable to others reported in the literature for healthy individuals (1.32±1.07 and 1.10±.59, for HT and LT respectively). Moreover, there was no direct relationship between any of the time or frequency domain indices of HRV and the rate of decline in SV during the orthostatic stress test. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this investigation do not support HRV as a valid indicator of orthostatic intolerance. Furthermore, individual differences in HRV cannot be used to predict the cardiovascular response to an orthostatic challenge.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.274 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicine & Science in Sports & ExerciseSame topicHeart Rate Variability and Autonomic ControlFrench-language works237,207