MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

No Sex Differences In Diaphragmatic Fatigue When Matched For Absolute Force During Inspiratory Pressure-threshold Loading

2019· article· en· W2955229133 on OpenAlexaffabout
Caitlin M. Geary, Joseph F. Welch, Malcolm R. McDonald, Carli M. Peters, Paige A. Reinhard, Michael G. Leahy, A. William Sheel

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiaphragmatic breathingDiaphragm (acoustics)Blood pressureCardiologyMedicineInternal medicineHeart rateDiaphragm muscleRespiratory systemPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It has recently been demonstrated that women experience an attenuated cardiovascular response to inspiratory pressure-threshold loading (PTL). Furthermore, due to a significantly longer time to task failure, the rate of development of diaphragmatic fatigue (DF) is slower in women compared to men. It is unclear if the abovementioned differences are due to discrepancies in absolute diaphragm force output. PURPOSE: To examine sex differences in DF when matched for absolute diaphragmatic pressure during inspiratory PTL. METHODS: Fourteen healthy men (n= 6) and women (n= 8) performed a single bout of PTL for five minutes. Subjects were required to breathe in a square-wave fashion whilst targeting a transdiaphragmatic pressure (Pdi) of 92 cm H2O. Fatigue of the diaphragm was assessed via twitch Pdi (Pdi,tw) using cervical magnetic stimulation. Cardiovascular responses, including heart rate (HR) and mean arterial blood pressure (MAP) were monitored beat-by-beat throughout PTL. RESULTS: Following inspiratory PTL, the total work done by the diaphragm (~13,500 cm H2O·s, p= 0.50) and the reduction in Pdi,tw was not different between sexes (M = 26 ± 8%, W = 25 ± 9%; p= 0.82). When scaled to body mass, women produced more diaphragmatic pressure (M = 38 ± 7 cm H2O·s·min-1·kg-1, W = 45 ± 8 cm H2O·s·min-1·kg-1;p= 0.01). There was no effect of sex on Δ HR (M = +14 ± 12 bpm, W = +15 ± 9 bpm; p= 0.50) during PTL; however, Δ MAP was lower in women compared to men (M = +31 ± 16 mmHg, W = +21 ± 13 mmHg; p= 0.03). CONCLUSION: Inspiratory PTL matched for absolute diaphragmatic work results in a similar degree of DF between sexes. Despite performing the same level of absolute diaphragmatic work and developing the same degree of DF, women demonstrate an attenuated inspiratory muscle metaboreflex. Sponsor: Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, UBC Physical Activity and Precision Health Cluster

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

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)0.0050.001

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.270 · 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
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise→Same topicChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Research→French-language works237,207→