Associations between air pollution and cardio-respiratory physiological measures in older adults exercising outdoors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We examined whether exercising indoors vs. outdoors reduced the cardio-respiratory effects of outdoor air pollution. Adults ≥55 were randomly assigned to exercise indoors when the Air Quality Health Index was ≥5 and outdoors on other days (intervention group, n = 37), or outdoors everyday (control group, n = 35). Both groups completed cardio-respiratory measurements before and after exercise for up to 10 weeks. Data were analyzed using linear mixed effect regression models. In the control group, an interquartile range increase in fine particulate matter (PM2.5) was associated with increases of 1.4% in heart rate (standard error (SE) = 0.7%) and 5.6% (SE = 2.6%) in malondialdehyde, and decreases of 5.6% (SE = 2.5%) to 16.5% (SE = 7.5%) in heart rate variability measures. While the hypothesized benefit of indoor vs. outdoor exercise could not be demonstrated due to an insufficient number of intervention days (n = 2), the study provides evidence of short-term effects of air pollution in older adults. ISRCTN #26552763.
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 | 0.001 | 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".