Effects of isometric resistance training on resting blood pressure
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Previous meta-analyses based on aggregate group-level data report antihypertensive effects of isometric resistance training (IRT). However, individual participant data meta-analyses provide more robust effect size estimates and permit examination of demographic and clinical variables on IRT effectiveness. METHODS: We conducted a systematic search and individual participant data (IPD) analysis, using both a one-step and two-step approach, of controlled trials investigating at least 3 weeks of IRT on resting systolic, diastolic and mean arterial blood pressure. RESULTS: Anonymized individual participant data were provided from 12 studies (14 intervention group comparisons) involving 326 participants (52.7% medicated for hypertension); 191 assigned to IRT and 135 controls, 25.2% of participants had diagnosed coronary artery disease. IRT intensity varied (8-30% MVC) and training duration ranged from 3 to 12 weeks. The IPD (one-step) meta-analysis showed a significant treatment effect for the exercise group participants experiencing a reduction in resting SBP of -6.22 mmHg (95% CI -7.75 to -4.68; P < 0.00001); DBP of -2.78 mmHg (95% CI -3.92 to -1.65; P = 0.002); and mean arterial blood pressure (MAP) of -4.12 mmHg (95% CI -5.39 to -2.85; P < 0.00001). The two-step approach yielded similar results for change in SBP -7.35 mmHg (-8.95 to -5.75; P < 0.00001), DBP MD -3.29 mmHg (95% CI -5.12 to -1.46; P = 0.0004) and MAP MD -4.63 mmHg (95% CI -6.18 to -3.09: P < 0.00001). Sub-analysis revealed that neither clinical, medication, nor demographic participant characteristics, or exercise program features, modified the IRT treatment effect. CONCLUSION: This individual patient analysis confirms a clinically meaningful and statistically significant effect of IRT on resting SBP, DBP and mean arterial blood pressure.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it