MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

[OP.8A.04] AMBULATORY BLOOD PRESSURE REDUCTION FOLLOWING HIGH-INTENSITY INTERVAL EXERCISE PERFORMED IN WATER OR DRYLAND CONDITION

2016· article· en· W2484109671 on OpenAlexaff
P. Sosner, Mathieu Gayda, O. Dupuy, Mauricio Garzón, C Lemasson, Vincent Grémeaux, Julie Lalongé, M. Gonzalés, D. Hayami, Martin Juneau, Anil Nigam, L. Bosquet

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Hypertension · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular and exercise physiology
Canadian institutionsMontreal Heart Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAmbulatoryAmbulatory blood pressureCardiologyBlood pressurePulse wave velocityInternal medicineArterial stiffnessIntensity (physics)DiastoleHemodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: We aimed to compare prolonged hypotension following moderate-intensity continuous exercise (MICE), high-intensity interval exercise (HIIE) in dry land or HIIE in immersed condition, using 24-h ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM). Design and method: Forty-two individuals (Table 1) suffering from hypertension or with a baseline blood pressure (BP) > = 130/85 mmHg (systolic/diastolic, SBP/DBP), were randomly assigned to performing one of the three following exercises on a stationary cycle: MICE (24-min at 50% peak power output (PPO)) or HIIE in dry land (two sets of 10-min with phases of 15-sec at 100% PPO interspersed by 15-sec of passive recovery) or HIIE in up-to-the-chest immersed condition. ABPM and ambulatory pulse wave velocity (PWV) were assessed during the 24-h after.Results: While MICE modified none of the 24-h average hemodynamic variables, dryland HIIE induced a 24-h BP decrease (SBP: −3.6 ± 5.7 / DBP: −2.8 ± 3.0 mmHg, P < 0.05) and, to a much greater extent, immersed HIIE (SBP: −6.8 ± 9.5 / DBP: −3.0 ± 4.5 mmHg, P < 0.05). The one condition that modified 24-h PWV was immersed HIIE (−0.21 ± 0.30 m/s, P < 0.05). Conclusions: HIIE performed on a stationary cycle in immersed condition, appeared more effective than HIIE in dry land and MICE in improving 24-h ABPM. In addition, cycling in water alleviated 24-h arterial stiffness.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.106
Threshold uncertainty score0.354

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1060.012

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.220 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNon-randomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of HypertensionSame topicCardiovascular and exercise physiologyFrench-language works237,207