Endurance exercise in seniors: Tonic, toxin or neither?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Cardiac adaptation to sustained exercise in the athletes is established. However, exercise-associated effect on the cardiac function of the elderly has to be elucidated. The aim of this study was to analyse left (LV) and right ventricular (RV) characteristics at different levels of chronic exercise in the senior heart. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We studied 178 participants in the World Senior Games (mean age 68 ± 8 years, 86 were men; 48%). Three groups were defined based on the type and intensity of sports: low-, moderate- and high-intensity level. Exclusion criteria were coronary artery disease, atrial fibrillation, valvular heart disease or uncontrolled hypertension. LV and RV size and function were evaluated with an echocardiogram. RESULTS: LV trans-mitral inflow deceleration time decreased in parallel to the intensity of chronic exercise: 242 ± 54 ms in low-, 221 ± 52 ms in moderate- and 215 ± 58 ms in high-intensity level, p = .03. Left atrial volume index (LAVI) was larger in high-intensity group, p = .001. The LAVI remained significantly larger when adjusting for age, gender, heart rate, hypertension and diabetes (p = .002). LV and RV sizes were larger in the high-intensity group. LV ejection fraction and RV systolic function evaluated by tissue Doppler velocity, atrioventricular plane displacement and strain did not differ between groups. CONCLUSION: Left ventricular diastolic filling is not only preserved, but may also be enhanced in long-term, top-level senior athletes. Moreover, LV and RV systolic function remain unchanged at different levels of exercise. This supports the beneficial effects of endurance exercise participation in senior hearts.
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".