Effects of an adapted cardiac rehabilitation programme on arterial stiffness in patients with type 2 diabetes without cardiac disease diagnosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: To determine the effects of a 12-week cardiac rehabilitation programme of aerobic and resistance exercise training on arterial stiffness, peak calf vasodilatory reserve, and haemostatic markers in patients with type 2 diabetes. Methods: Observational cohort study examining effects of 12 weeks of exercise training in 23 subjects (13 men, 10 women; mean age of 56.1 ± 10.1 years) with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Subjects performed exercise training for 12 weeks [aerobic training 5 days/week, 70%–75% peak cardiovascular fitness (VO 2peak ) and resistance training 2–3 days/week, 60% of one repetition maximum]. Vascular stiffness (pulse-wave velocity), augmentation index, peak calf vasodilatory reserve, and VO 2peak were measured pre- and post-exercise training. Secondary outcomes included heart rate variability and haemostatic measures. Results: VO 2peak increased by 16% (20.1 ± 5.5 vs 23.2 ± 8.8 mL/kg/min, p = 0.002) and abdominal circumference was reduced (101.9 ± 13.3 vs 97.9 ± 12.7 cm, p < 0.03). Vascular function was improved including central arterial stiffness (central pulse-wave velocity: 8.44 ± 1.75 vs 8.02 ± 1.60 m/s, p = 0.026) and the aortic augmentation index (21.7 ± 10.6% vs 18.3 ± 12.6%, p = 0.005); peak calf vasodilatory reserve increased from 30.3 ± 10.6 mL/100 mL/min to 38.0 ± 15.3 mL/100 mL/min ( p = 0.04). No changes were seen in heart rate variability, blood lipids, glycated haemoglobin and C-reactive protein. Conclusion: A 12-week cardiac rehabilitation programme of aerobic and resistance training significantly reduces arterial stiffness and improves aerobic fitness in individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 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".