After-exercise heart rate variability is attenuated in postmenopausal women and unaffected by estrogen therapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Delayed heart rate (HR) recovery in the immediate postexercise period has been linked to adverse cardiovascular prognosis. The after effects of an acute bout of exercise on HR modulation in postmenopausal women (PMW) and the influence of estrogen therapy are unknown. METHODS: In 13 sedentary PMW (54 ± 2 y, mean ± SEM), we assessed HR variability (HRV)--an index of HR modulation--and the influence of estrogen therapy on HRV. HRV in the frequency domain was quantified during supine rest and again 60 minutes after treadmill exercise for 45 minutes, at 60% VO2peak. PMW were studied before and after 4 weeks of oral estradiol. To obtain reference values for the after effects of exercise on HRV in healthy young women, 14 premenopausal women (PreM) completed the identical exercise protocol. RESULTS: Compared with PreM, PMW demonstrated lower high frequency (vagal modulation) and total HRV (P < 0.05) at rest. In PreM, all HRV values were similar before and after exercise. In contrast, in PMW after exercise, despite having identical HR to PreM, high frequency and total HRV were all lower (all P ≤ 0.01) compared with pre-exercise HRV values. Estrogen therapy had no effect on pre or postexercise values for HRV. CONCLUSIONS: When compared with PreM, PMW have identical HR, but lower vagal HR modulation at rest and delayed HRV recovery after exercise. Estrogen does not restore baseline HRV or accelerate HRV recovery postexercise, suggesting aging rather than estrogen deficiency per se may lower HRV in PMW.
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 | 0.006 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".