MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Differences in Cerebral Oxygenation Following Aerobic and Resistance Exercise

2017· article· en· W2619853526 on OpenAlexaff
Travis J. Hrubeniuk, Jeff Leiter

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury Research
Canadian institutionsPan Am ClinicUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOxygenationAerobic exercisePhysical therapyCerebral blood flowConcussionPhysical medicine and rehabilitationCardiologyAnesthesiaPoison controlEmergency medicineInjury prevention

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cerebral blood flow and oxygenation are important variables to consider for concussion diagnosis and treatment. As a result, monitoring these variables throughout progressive aerobic exercise has emerged as a potential concussion management tool, as well as an indicator for return to sport, school or work. However, such a mechanism may not be specific to the sport or workplace to which the individual is returning. Understanding how a healthy brain responds to various types of exercise has the potential to create more individualized methods of concussion management. PURPOSE: To identify the differences in cerebral oxygenation recovery following bouts of maximal resistance and aerobic exercise. METHODS: Twenty-eight physically active, healthy participants aged 18-35 were recruited, each partaking in two sessions. At the first session anthropometric measures and leg press 1-RM were determined. During the second session participants completed a maximal leg press resistance training protocol, followed 30 minutes later by a maximal aerobic protocol. Participants were connected to a cerebral oximeter and metabolic cart for monitoring. As such, cerebral oxygenation and ventilatory gas exchange variables were documented throughout the duration of exercise and for 15-minutes of passive recovery post-test. RESULTS: Maximal aerobic exercise resulted in a progressive increase in cerebral oxygenation following cessation of exercise until peaking at 70.61 ± 7.41%, 300-seconds post-test. This represents a significant rise from a baseline value of 66.00 ± 5.48%. The rise in oxygenation following aerobic exercise differed from resistance exercise from 90-seconds onwards, as resistance exercise did not result in a significant change from its 66.89 ± 5.62% baseline value. CONCLUSION: While maximal aerobic exercise resulted in significant increases in cerebral oxygenation from baseline levels throughout recovery, maximal resistance exercise did not elicit the same response. This indicates that aerobic exercise results in a metabolic strain on the brain which differs from the strain experienced as a result of resistance exercise. As such, expecting equivalent outcomes and utility as concussion management tools from both exercise methods may be misguided and requires additional research.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.048
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.289 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise→Same topicTraumatic Brain Injury Research→French-language works237,207→