Isometric handgrip training-induced reductions in blood pressure: The influence of age and cardiovascular reactivity as an outcome predictor in normotensive women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The World Health Organization has identified hypertension (HTN) as a global health crisis and emphasizes primary prevention as the key to mitigating HTN-related morbidity and mortality. Hypertension Canada and the American Heart Association promote isometric handgrip (IHG) exercise as an adjuvant therapy for controlling blood pressure (BP). Coupling IHG training with a method for identifying responders to this intervention would strengthen its use as a tool for the primary prevention of HTN. The aim of this prospective study was to determine whether systolic BP reactivity to a stress task (i.e. IHG task, IHGT; serial subtraction task, SST) is predictive of IHG training-induced BP adaptations in both young and older normotensive women. Following 10 weeks of IHG training, significant and equal reductions in resting systolic BP were observed in both young (n = 7) and older women (n = 7, P < 0.05). Concomitant reductions in 24 hour and daytime ambulatory systolic BP were also observed in both cohorts (n = 5 older, n = 7 young, P < 0.05). Systolic BP reactivity to the IHGT, but not the SST, was predictive of 24 hour ambulatory systolic BP reductions in older women only (n = 5, P < 0.05). These findings support the use of IHG training as a primary HTN prevention tool in both young and older normotensive women. Moreover, although preliminary, these findings suggest that systolic BP reactivity to an IHGT may be used to identify responders to IHG training for the purpose of prescribing IHG exercise in older women.
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 | 0.001 | 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".