Influence of sex and training status on cardiac and baroreceptor function following combined high‐intensity interval exercise and orthostatic stress
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Training status and sex have been shown to impact sympathetic activation with intense exercise, and tolerance to orthostatic challenges. The purpose of this investigation was to assess the effects of sex and training status on cardiac and autonomic responses following high‐intensity interval exercise (HIT) and lower body negative pressure (LBNP). We hypothesized that endurance‐trained (ET) females would display greatest decrements. Ventricular function (echocardiography) and baroreceptor sensitivity (BRS) were assessed in 33(13f) normally active (NA) and ET subjects during LBNP (0, −20, −40 and −60 mmHg), before and after HIT (15 bouts of 1:2 min work:recovery cycling at 100 and 40%, respectively). A three‐way mixed model ANOVA was used to compare dependent variables between sex and training status, within LBNP and condition. Men and women responded similarly to combined HIT and LBNP. Throughout, women displayed enhanced strain, diastolic strain rate, and BRS ( P >;0.05). Pre‐exercise BRS decreased greater in ET than NA (0 to −60 mmHg: NA, 17.3±12.8 to 17.0±17.5; ET, 26.1±10.5 to 16.9±4.1, ms/mmHg), but post‐exercise, recovery of BRS was more rapid in ET (NA, 9.6±5.0 to 9.4±5.5; ET, 8.2±4.4 to 13.5±7.6, ms/mmHg; P <0.01). In conclusion, it would appear that the cardiac and autonomic stability of ET and women during an orthostatic challenge is not compromised in the face of short (45 min) high‐intensity training.
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) | 0.002 | 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".