MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2081660309 · doi:10.2147/oajsm.s32851

Left ventricular twisting mechanics and exercise in healthy individuals: a systematic review

2012· review· en· W2081660309 on OpenAlexaff
Darren E. R. Warburton, Phillips, Bredin, Taylor Drury

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Access Journal of Sports Medicine · 2012
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Function and Risk Factors
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiastoleCardiologyMedicineInternal medicinePhysical therapyBlood pressure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this study was to review systematically the effects of exercise on left ventricular (LV) twisting mechanics in healthy individuals. Literature searches were conducted in electronic databases for articles reporting measures of LV twisting mechanics in healthy individuals before and during/after exercise. Upon review, 18 articles were analyzed. Studies were separated by exercise type into the following four categories to allow for detailed comparisons: submaximal, prolonged endurance, maximal, and chronic endurance. Despite an overall methodological quality of low to moderate and within-group variations in exercise intensity, duration, and subject characteristics, important trends in the literature emerged. Most important, the coupling of LV systolic twisting and diastolic untwisting was present in all exercise types, as both were either improved or impaired concomitantly, highlighting the linkage between systole and diastole provided through LV twist. In addition, trends regarding the effects of age, training status, and cardiac loading also became apparent within different exercise types. Furthermore, a potential dose-response relationship between exercise duration and the degree of impairment to LV twisting mechanics was found. Although some disagreement existed in results, the observed trends provide important directions for future research. Future investigations should be of higher methodological quality and should include consistent exercise protocols and subject populations in order to minimize the variability between investigations.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.217
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0100.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.099
GPT teacher head0.415
Teacher spread0.316 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations7
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen Access Journal of Sports MedicineSame topicCardiovascular Function and Risk FactorsFrench-language works237,207