Evaluating the NIRS-derived microvascular O2 extraction “reserve” in groups varying in sex and training status using leg blood flow occlusions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It has been demonstrated that the plateau in the near-infrared spectroscopy (NIRS) derived deoxygenated hemoglobin and myoglobin (deoxy[Hb+Mb]) signal (i.e., deoxy[Hb+Mb]PLATEAU) towards the end of a ramp-incremental (RI) test does not represent the upper-limit in O2 extraction of the vastus lateralis (VL) muscle, given that an O2 extraction reserve has been recently observed. This study aimed to investigate whether this O2 extraction reserve was present in various populations and whether it exhibited sex- and/or training- related differences.Sixteen men- 8 untrained (27±5 years; 83±11 kg; 179±9 cm), 8 trained (27±4 years; 82±10 kg; 182±8 cm) and 9 trained women (27±2 years; 66±10 kg; 172±6 cm) performed a RI cycling test to exhaustion. The NIRS-derived deoxy[Hb+Mb] signal was measured continuously on the VL as a proxy for O2 extraction. A leg blood flow occlusion (i.e., ischemia) was performed at rest (LBFOCC 1) and immediately post the RI test (LBFOCC 2).No significant difference was found between the deoxy[Hb+Mb] amplitude during LBFOCC 1 and the deoxy[Hb+Mb]PLATEAU (p>0.05) nor between baseline (bsln) deoxy[Hb+Mb] values. deoxy[Hb+Mb] amplitude during LBFOCC 2 was significantly greater than LBFOCC 1 and at deoxy[Hb+Mb]PLATEAU (p<0.05) with group means ~30-45% higher than the deoxy[Hb+Mb]PLATEAU and LBFOCC 1 (p<0.05). No significant differences were found between groups in O2 extraction reserve, regardless of sex- or training-statusThe results of this study demonstrated the existence of an O2 extraction reserve in different populations, and that neither sex- nor training-related differences affect the amplitude of the reserve.
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".