Higher Cortisol Predicts Less Improvement in Verbal Memory Performance after Cardiac Rehabilitation in Patients with Coronary Artery Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective. While physical activity can improve verbal memory performance in subjects with coronary artery disease (CAD), there is large variability in response. Elevated cortisol production has been suggested to negatively affect verbal memory performance, yet cortisol concentrations have not been assessed as a predictor of response to exercise intervention in those with CAD. Methods. CAD patients participating in a one-year cardiac rehabilitation program were recruited. Memory was assessed with the California Verbal Learning Test second edition at baseline and one year. Cortisol was measured from a 20 mg, 3.0 cm hair sample collected at baseline. Results. In patients with CAD (n = 56, mean ± SD age = 66 ± 11, 86% male), higher cortisol (hair cortisol concentrations ≥ 153.2 ng/g) significantly predicted less memory improvement (F(1,50) = 5.50, P = 0.02) when controlling for age (F(1,50) = 0.17, P = 0.68), gender (F(1,50) = 2.51, P = 0.12), maximal oxygen uptake (F(1,50) = 1.88, P = 0.18), and body mass index (F(1,50) = 3.25, P = 0.08). Conclusion. Prolonged hypothalamic pituitary adrenal axis activation may interfere with exercise-related improvements in memory in CAD.
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 | 0.003 |
| 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".