Temporal Response of Arterial Stiffness to Ultra-Marathon
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this investigation was to characterize the arterial stiffness of male ultra-marathon runners (n = 9) using pulse wave velocity (cfPWV) and radial tonometry over the course of an ultra-marathon and during recovery. Measures were collected at rest, immediately following 45 km/75 km of running, then following 60 and 90 min of recovery. No statistical difference was found between baseline cfPWV and normative values. The cfPWV of ultra-endurance runners decreased at 45 km (3.4 ± 1.6 m/s, p=0.006), followed by an increase (1.6 ± 1.8 m/s, p = 0.04) toward baseline levels at the 75 km mark. Radial tonometry measures also indicated small artery stiffness was transiently increased after 75 km. The amount of training time (r = 0.82, p = 0.007) and the duration of a typical training session (r = 0.73, p = 0.03) were correlated strongly with persisting decrements in large artery compliance at 60 min of recovery. The finding that arterial stiffness decreased at the 45 km distance and then reverted back toward baseline levels with prolonged running, may indicate a role of exercise duration or accumulated stress for affecting vascular compliance. At present, it is premature to suggest that athletes should alter training or racing practices to protect vascular health.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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".