The effect of pre-exercise diesel exhaust exposure on cycling performance and cardio-respiratory variables
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To determine the effect of pre-exercise exposure to diesel exhaust (DE) on 20-km cycling performance, pulmonary function, and cardio-respiratory variables during exercise. METHODS: Eight endurance-trained males participated in the study. Test days consisted of a 60-min exposure to either filtered air (FA) or DE, followed by a 20 km cycling time trial. Exposures to DE were at a concentration of 300 µg/m³ of PM(2.5). Forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV₁) and forced vital capacity (FVC) were measured before and after exposure, and after exercise. Oxygen consumption (VO₂) and carbon dioxide production (VCO₂), minute ventilation (V(E)), tidal volume (V(T)), breathing frequency (F(B)), heart rate and oxyhemoglobin saturation (SpO₂), were collected during the time trials. The effect of condition on time trial duration, an order effect, and mean cardio-respiratory variables were each analysed using paired T-tests. Repeated-measures ANOVA were used to assess the effect of DE exposure on pulmonary function. RESULTS: There was a main effect of condition (FA vs. DE) on the change in FEV₁ from baseline, and in exercise heart rate. Post hoc tests revealed that exercise-induced bronchodilation was significantly attenuated following DE compared to FA. There were no main effects of condition on 20 km cycling performance, or VO₂, VCO₂, V(E), V(T), F(B) and SpO₂ during a 20 km time trial. CONCLUSION: A 60-min exposure to DE prior to exercise significantly attenuated exercise-induced bronchodilation and significantly increased heart rate during exercise. Pre-exercise exposure to diesel exhaust did not significantly impair 20 km cycling time trial performance.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".