Cardiovascular control during heat stress in older adults: time for an update
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is generally accepted that older adults display an impaired cardiovascular response to heat stress, and it has been suggested that this impaired response contributes to their increased risk of mortality during extreme heat events. Seminal studies have shown that cutaneous vasodilation, the redistribution of blood flow from visceral organs, and the increase in cardiac output are blunted in older adults during passive heating. The blunted rise of cardiac output was initially attributed to an inability to maintain stroke volume, suggesting that cardiac systolic and/or diastolic function does not adequately respond to the constraints of heat stress in older adults. Recent studies evaluated potential mechanisms underlying these seminal findings and their results challenge some of these initial observations. Notably, stroke volume is maintained during heat exposure in older adults and studies have provided evidence for preserved cardiac systolic and diastolic functions in this population. Nonetheless, a blunted increase in cardiac output during heat exposure remains a consistent observation in older adults, although it is now attributed to a blunted increase in heart rate. Recent studies have also evaluated the possibility that the attenuated capacity of aged skin to vasodilate contributes to a blunted increase in cardiac output during heat stress. The objective of this Mini-Review is to highlight these recent advances and challenge the long-standing view that the control of stroke volume during heat exposure is compromised in older adults. By doing so, our intent is to stimulate future studies to evaluate several unanswered questions in this area of research.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
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".