MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Reproducibility Of The Impact Of Menstrual Phase On Arterial Stiffness Over Two Consecutive Menstrual Cycles

2020· article· en· W3040906407 on OpenAlexaff
Lindsay A. Lew, Kaitlyn R. Liu, Amanda C. Byrne, Tarrah Ethier, Hashim Islam, Kyra E. Pyke

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Health and Disease Prevention
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArterial stiffnessFollicular phaseMenstrual cycleMedicineInternal medicineEstrogenCardiologyEndocrinologyPeripheralHormoneBlood pressure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Chronic increases in arterial stiffness are associated with increased risk of cardiovascular disease. Estrogen (E2), the primary female sex hormone, has been found to have cardioprotective effects, with several but not all, studies reporting a reduction in arterial stiffness in the late follicular (high E2; LF) phase compared to the early follicular (low E2; EF) phase of the menstrual cycle. Individual heterogeneity in the impact of phase on arterial stiffness and the consistency of these responses across consecutive cycles has yet to be explored. PURPOSE: to determine the impact of menstrual phase E2 fluctuations on arterial stiffness over two consecutive cycles. METHODS: 13 premenopausal women completed 4 experimental visits over 2 menstrual cycles (EFvisit 1, LFvisit 2, EFvisit 3, LFvisit 4). Central (CF) and peripheral (FF) PWV were measured twice during each visit using arterial tonometry. Participants were classified as positive, negative or non-responders, wherein positive responders experienced a reduction in PWV from EF to LF and negative responders experienced an increase in PWV from EF to LF that was greater than 2*typical error. RESULTS: At the group level, CF PWV did not differ between phases (p=0.11) or cycles (p=0.18; EFvisit 1=5.8±0.8, LFvisit 2=5.6±0.5, EFvisit 3=5.9±0.6, LFvisit 4=5.8±0.7). Likewise, FF PWV did not differ between phases (p=0.979) or cycles (p=0.58; EFvisit 1=8.1±1.0, LFvisit 2=8.1±1.1, EFvisit 3=7.9±1.4, LFvisit 4=8.0±1.3). Phase changes in E2 were not associated with phase changes in PWV in cycle 1 (CF: r=0.38, p=0.20; FF: r=0.11, p=0.73) or cycle 2 (FF: r=0.38, p=0.36). Classification of individuals as responders or non-responders revealed that no participants were consistently positive or negative responders for both cycles. CONCLUSION: At the group level, arterial stiffness was not impacted by menstrual phase over two cycles. Individual changes in arterial stiffness were inconsistent, with phase changes in cycle 1 not reflecting phase changes in cycle 2. Variability in phase changes in arterial stiffness does not appear to be driven by inter-individual differences in E2 fluctuation across phase. Future research is needed to investigate the mechanisms resulting in inter-individual variability in arterial stiffness and inconsistency between cycles. Funded by NSERC

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.340 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise→Same topicCardiovascular Health and Disease Prevention→French-language works237,207→