Adults With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Exhibit a Greater Exercise-Induced Increase in Arterial Stiffness and Vessel Hemodynamics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) have a greater blood pressure (BP) response to acute maximal exercise compared to those without T2DM; however, whether they exhibit a different arterial stiffness response to maximal exercise has yet to be explored. Adults with (n=66) and without T2DM (n=61) underwent an arterial stress test: at rest and immediately postexercise, carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity, the gold standard measure of arterial stiffness, brachial BP, heart rate, and other hemodynamic measurements were assessed. Linear regression models were used to evaluate between-group differences at rest, and the response to exercise (postexercise value), adjusting for covariates including BP and heart rate when relevant, and the corresponding baseline value of each parameter. All participants (mean±SD: age 59.3±10.6 years; body mass index 31.2±3.9 kg/m 2 ) had hypertension (mean BP 130±14/80±9 mm Hg). At rest, participants with T2DM had significantly higher carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity (10.3±2.7 versus 9.1±1.9 m/s), heart rate (69±11 versus 66±10 beats/min), and lower diastolic BP (79±9 versus 83±9 mm Hg), but systolic BP (129±15 versus 131±13 mm Hg) was similar. In response to exercise, participants with T2DM showed greater increases in carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity (1.6 [95% CI, 0.4–2.9 m/s]) and systolic BP (9 [95% CI, 1–17 mm Hg]) than participants without T2DM. A greater proportion of participants with T2DM had a hypertensive response to exercise compared to participants without T2DM (n=23, 35% versus n=11, 18%; P =0.033). By incorporating exercise as a vascular stressor, we provide evidence of a greater increase in arterial stiffness in individuals with T2DM, independently of resting arterial stiffness, and the BP postexercise.
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".