Gender Differences in Pulmonary Gas Exchange in Morbidly Obese Subjects
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: There may be gender differences in pulmonary gas exchange in morbidly obese subjects (see Chest 2007; 131:362-367). PURPOSE: The purpose was to compare pulmonary gas exchange in morbidly obese men and women at rest and thoughout exercise. METHODS: Twenty-five women (age = 38 ± 10 yrs, 164 ± 7 cm, body mass index or BMI = 51 ± 7 kg/m2, peak oxygen consumption or VO2peak = 2.0 ± 0.4 L/min) and 17 men (age = 43 ± 9 yrs, 178 ± 7 cm, BMI = 50 ± 10 kg/m2, VO2peak = 2.6 ± 0.8 L/min) were recruited to perform a graded exercise test on a cycle ergometer with temperature-corrected arterial blood-gas samples taken at rest and every minute of exercise, including peak exercise. RESULTS: Approximately 350 blood-gas samples were measured in total. At rest, women had better pulmonary gas exchange compared to the men (p < 0.01), which was related to the lower waist-to-hip ratio (WHR) in the women (p < 0.01). At peak exercise, arterial plasma lactate concentration was 8 ± 3 mmol/L, which was not different between genders. Only 20% of the subjects had an excessive alveolar-to-arterial oxygen partial pressure difference (>/= 25 mmHg) at peak exercise, but 80% of the subjects showed inadequate compensatory hyperventilation at peak exercise (arterial carbon dioxide pressure > 35 mmHg); both were not different between genders. CONCLUSION: At rest, morbidly obese men have poorer pulmonary gas exchange compared to morbidly obese women, which is related to the lower WHR in women. At exercise, few subjects showed disturbances in pulmonary gas exchange despite demonstrating poor compensatory hyperventilation at peak exercise. Sponsored by Quebec Health Research Foundation (FRSQ).
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) | 0.002 | 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".