Effects of long term resistance training on left ventricular morphology.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of long term (mean +/- SD 10+/-5 years, range three to 25 years) resistance training on left ventricular (LV) dimensions and mass. METHODS AND RESULTS: The study participants were 21 elite male power-lifters (age 33.4+/-5.9 years) and 10 sedentary male control subjects (age 30.9+/-4.2 years). Two-dimensionally guided transthoracic M-mode echocardiograms were obtained at rest to quantify LV diastolic cavity dimension, posterior wall thickness, ventricular septal wall thickness and LV mass. Long term resistance training was not associated with an alteration in LV diastolic cavity dimension (resistance trained 54. 4+/-4.3 mm versus control 51.8+/-5.6 mm), ventricular septal wall thickness (resistance trained 9.7+/-1.0 mm versus control 10.1+/-0.7 mm), posterior wall thickness (resistance trained 9.6+/-1.5 mm versus control 9.3+/-1.4 mm) or LV mass (resistance trained 200. 3+/-32.5 g versus control 186.5+/-39.6 g). In addition, no resistance-trained athlete was found to have an LV mean wall thickness above clinical normal limits (12 mm or less). CONCLUSION: Contrary to common beliefs, long term resistance training as performed by elite male power-lifters does not alter LV morphology.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".