Arterial stiffness following repeated Valsalva maneuvers and resistance exercise in young men
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to compare arterial stiffness after a bout of resistance exercise (RE) and an experimental condition consisting of repeated Valsalva maneuvers (VMs). Fourteen male participants randomly completed a lower-body, unilateral RE bout and a VM bout designed to alter blood pressure (BP) in a similar pulsatile fashion. Pulse-wave velocity (PWV, measured in metres per second (m.s-1)) was used to measure central and peripheral arterial stiffness and was assessed before and 20 min after each perturbation. Beat-to-beat blood pressure (BP) was assessed during bouts using finger plethysmography. Change in systolic BP, diastolic BP, mean arterial pressure, and pulse pressure were similar during both bouts. Central PWV increased after repeated VMs (7.1 +/- 0.3 m/s to 7.8 +/- 0.3 m/s), but not after RE (7.2 +/- 0.3 m/s to 7.2 +/- 0.3 m/s) (interaction, p = 0.032). There was no change in peripheral PWV after VM (8.9 +/- 0.3 m/s to 9.3 +/- 0.3 m/s) or RE (8.5 +/- 0.2 m/s to 8.4 +/- 0.2 m/s). Arterial stiffness increased after repeated VM. Even though presented with a similar BP load, arterial stiffness did not increase after acute RE. These findings suggest a role for VM in acutely altering arterial properties.
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 | 0.000 | 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".