Correlates of reactive hyperemic index in men and postmenopausal women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of the present study was to investigate the differences in digital reactive hyperemic index (RHI) in men and postmenopausal women. We investigated the differences in and correlates of RHI, measured by peripheral artery tonometry (PAT), in a group of 82 men (mean age ± SD: 55.6 ± 8.2 years; body mass index: 29.0 ± 4.2 kg/m(2)) and 125 postmenopausal women (58.9 ± 5.2 years; 27.7 ± 4.1 kg/m(2)). We also examined fRHI values (natural log of the PAT ratio of the 90-120 seconds post-occlusion interval) and augmentation index (AIx) as a measure of arterial stiffness. We found that RHI, fRHI and AIx were significantly lower in men compared to postmenopausal women (p<0.0001). We also found that fRHI values were significantly lower in individuals with (MetS+) versus without (MetS-) the metabolic syndrome (MetS). Endothelial inflammation was present in MetS+ subjects as indicated by increased plasma soluble intercellular adhesion molecule-1 (sICAM-1) (p<0.001) and E-selectin (p=0.0519) concentrations compared to MetS- individuals. No significant difference was found in RHI or AIx between MetS+ versus MetS- individuals. In summary, our study reveals that men have an impairment of endothelial function, assessed by digital PAT, compared to postmenopausal women. Furthermore, we show that the presence of the MetS is characterized by endothelial dysfunction, as suggested by lower fRHI, as well as by endothelial inflammation, which likely contributes to the increased cardiovascular disease risk associated with the MetS. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01085019.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".