MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2765328209 · doi:10.1113/ep086311

The impact of menstrual phase on brachial artery flow‐mediated dilatation during handgrip exercise in healthy premenopausal women

2017· article· en· W2765328209 on OpenAlexafffund
Katrina D’Urzo, Trevor J. King, Jennifer S. Williams, Morgan Silvester, Kyra E. Pyke

Bibliographic record

VenueExperimental Physiology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Health and Disease Prevention
Canadian institutionsResponse Biomedical (Canada)Queen's University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBrachial arteryMedicineInternal medicineCardiologyMenstrual cycleEndocrinologyPhysical therapyHormoneBlood pressure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

New Findings What is the central question of this study? The aim of this study was to determine the influence of menstrual phase on flow‐mediated dilatation in response to sustained, exercise‐induced increases in shear stress. What is the main finding and its importance? We showed, for the first time, that in healthy, premenopausal women the flow‐mediated dilatation stimulated by exercise‐induced increases in shear stress did not fluctuate across two phases of the menstrual cycle, despite significant fluctuations in oestrogen. This suggests that endothelial function is not consistently augmented in the high‐oestrogen phase. Flow‐mediated dilatation (FMD) in response to a sustained shear‐stress stimulus (e.g. via handgrip exercise; HGEX) is emerging as a useful tool for assessing endothelial function; however, the impact of menstrual phase on HGEX‐FMD is unknown. The purpose of this study was to determine whether HGEX‐FMD fluctuates with cyclical changes in oestrogen concentrations over two discrete phases (low and high oestrogen) of the menstrual cycle. Brachial artery (BA) diameter and blood velocity were assessed with two‐dimesional and Doppler ultrasound, respectively. Shear stress was estimated using shear rate (SR = BA blood velocity/BA diameter). Participants (12 healthy, regularly cycling women, 21 ± 2 years of age) completed two experimental visits: (i) low oestrogen (early follicular, EF); and (ii) high oestrogen (late follicular, LF). Reactive hyperaemia‐stimulated FMD (RH‐FMD) and HGEX‐FMD (6 min of handgrip exercise) were assessed during each visit. Results are mean values ± SD. Oestrogen increased from the EF to LF phase (EF, 33 ± 9 pg ml −1 ; LF, 161 ± 113 pg ml −1 , P = 0.003). However, neither the SR stimuli (HGEX, P = 0.501; RH, P = 0.173) nor the FMD responses differed between phases (EF versus LF: HGEX‐FMD, 4.8 ± 2.8 versus 4.6 ± 2.2%, P = 0.601; RH‐FMD, 7.9 ± 4.3 versus 6.4 ± 3.1%, P = 0.071). These results extend existing RH‐FMD findings indicating that not all women experience fluctuations in FMD with the menstrual cycle. Further research is needed to investigate the mechanisms that underlie variability in the impact of menstrual phase on FMD.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.343 · 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

Citations46
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExperimental PhysiologySame topicCardiovascular Health and Disease PreventionFrench-language works237,207