MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN HEART RATE KINETICS AND RELATIVE EXERCISE INTENSITY

2001· article· en· W2074594313 on OpenAlexaff
Russell J. Down, Bharath Krishnan, Judith Burgess, E. Busse, Robert G. Haennel

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular and exercise physiology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntensity (physics)Exercise intensityCycle ergometerMathematicsAnalysis of varianceHeart rateRepeated measures designInternal medicineCardiologyIncremental exerciseAnimal scienceMedicineStatisticsBlood pressurePhysicsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study tested the hypothesis that a predictable relationship exists between HR kinetics and stepwise increments in exercise intensity, in 13 males exercising on a cycle ergometer (Age, 25 S109 4). Five step increment tests, each including a single increase in exercise intensity of 10% VO2 Reserve (VO2R), were conducted over two days with a minimum of 48 hours separating the testing days. VO2R represents the difference between peak VO2 and resting VO2. Each step increment test was 12 minutes in duration and included two 6 minute stages, a warm up stage and a target intensity stage. Each step increment test was labeled after its target intensity stage. The target intensity stages were 50, 60, 70, 80 and 90% VO2R (Δ = 10% VO2R) respectively. The power outputs representing these target intensities for each subject were derived from previous graded exercise tests (GXT). The temporal course of HR during the target intensity stages of each step increment test were analyzed using a monoexponential model in each subject. Both the absolute increase in HR (Δ HR) and the pattern of increase (t - time constant) were compared using an ANOVA with a post hoc Neuman Keuls Student Test. While there was no significant difference in the magnitude of the HR increase among the 5 targeted intensities, the pattern of HR increase changed significantly at the step increment test with a target intensity of 70% VO2R, (P < 0.05). No significant differences in HR kinetics existed among step increment tests below 70% VO2R (50 & 60% VO2R, p = NS) or above 70% VO2R (70, 80, 90% VO2R, p = NS). These results suggest that while there is no predictable relationship between pattern of HR rise and step increments in exercise intensity, HR kinetics during submaximal work intensities ie. < 70% VO2R appear significantly faster than equal step increments at higher intensities. These findings may reflect changes in autonomic drive observed at submaximal workload transitions.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
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)0.0020.001

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.267 · 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
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise→Same topicCardiovascular and exercise physiology→French-language works237,207→