Sex differences in associations between insulin resistance, heart rate variability, and arterial stiffness in healthy women and men: a physiology study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Diabetes confers greater cardiovascular risk to women than to men. Whether insulin-resistance-mediated risk extends to the healthy population is unknown. Measures of insulin resistance (fasting insulin, homeostatic model assessment, hemoglobin A1c, quantitative insulin sensitivity check index, glucose) were determined in 48 (56% female) healthy subjects. Heart rate variability (HRV) was calculated by spectral power analysis and arterial stiffness was determined using noninvasive applanation tonometry. Both were measured at baseline and in response to angiotensin II infusion. In women, there was a non-statistically significant trend towards increasing insulin resistance being associated with an overall unfavourable HRV response and increased arterial stiffness to the stressor, while men demonstrated the opposite response. Significant differences in the associations between insulin resistance and cardiovascular physiological profile exist between healthy women and men. Further studies investigating the sex differences in the pathophysiology of insulin resistance in cardiovascular disease are warranted.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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".