Intracranial Vascular Responses to High-Intensity Interval Exercise and Moderate-Intensity Steady-State Exercise in Children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To understand the extent different types of acute exercise influence cerebral blood flow during and following exercise in children. METHODS: Eight children (7-11 y; 4 girls) completed 2 conditions: high-intensity interval exercise (HIIE; 6 × 1-min sprints at 90% watt maximum) and moderate-intensity steady-state exercise (MISS; 15 min at 44% watt maximum). Blood velocity in the middle cerebral artery (MCAV) and heart rate were assessed continuously. The partial pressure of end-tidal carbon dioxide and mean arterial pressure were assessed at baseline and following exercise. RESULTS: Percentage of maximum heart rate during HIIE was 82% (4%), compared with 69% (4%) during MISS. MCAV was increased above baseline in MISS after 75 seconds (5.8% [3.9%], P × .004) but was unchanged during HIIE. MCAV was reduced below baseline (-10.7% [4.1%], P × .004) during the sixth sprint of HIIE. In both conditions, MCAV remained below baseline postexercise, but returned to baseline values 30-minute postexercise (P < .001). A postexercise increase in mean arterial pressure was apparent following HIIE and MISS, and persisted 30-minute postexercise. Partial pressure of end-tidal carbon dioxide declined post HIIE (-3.4 mm Hg, P < .05), but not following MISS. CONCLUSION: These preliminary findings show HIIE and MISS elicit differing intracranial vascular responses; however, research is needed to elucidate the implications and underlying regulatory mechanisms of these responses.
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) | 0.000 | 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".