A single bout of exercise promotes sustained left ventricular function improvement after isoproterenol-induced injury in mice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We have investigated whether acute (swimming) exercise is sufficient to have sustained beneficial effects against cardiac functional decline observed after high-dose isoproterenol administration. Mice were subjected to one bout of swimming for 30 min ("swim" group). Twenty-four hours later, they were given isoproterenol (160 mg/kg) to cause injury. Two control groups were included, a shallow "water" group, for which no swimming took place, and a "cage" group; they were both given isoproterenol as in the "swim" group. Cardiac function was assessed by tissue Doppler imaging (TDI) 24 h, 2 weeks, and 4 weeks post-isoproterenol. Left ventricular (LV) systolic function including endocardial velocity and radial strain rate declined significantly in all groups at all time points after isoproterenol, compared with their pre-isoproterenol treatment values. The "swim" group, however, had significantly higher LV systolic function compared with either of the control groups at 24 h, and this improvement persisted 2 and 4 weeks post-treatment. There were no significant differences between the control groups at any time point. In conclusion, a single bout of swimming has sustained beneficial effects against injury, as measured by TDI, after administration of isoproterenol.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".