Elevated peak systolic blood pressure in endurance‐trained athletes: Physiology or pathology?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Blood pressure is a function of cardiac output and peripheral vascular resistance. During graded exercise testing (GXT), systolic blood pressure (SBP) is expected to increase gradually along with work rate, oxygen consumption, heart rate, and cardiac output. Individuals exposed to chronic endurance training attain a greater exercise SBP than in their untrained state and sedentary counterparts, but it is currently unknown what is considered a safe upper limit. This review discusses key studies examining blood pressure response in sedentary individuals and athletes. We highlight the physiological characteristics of highly fit individuals in terms of cardiovascular physiology and exercise blood pressure and review the state of the current literature regarding the safety of high SBP during exercise in this particular subgroup. Findings from this review indicate that a consensus on what is a normal SBP response to exercise in highly fit subjects and direct causation linking high GXT SBP to pathology is lacking. Consequently, applying GXT SBP guidelines developed for a "normal" population to endurance-trained individuals appears unsupported at this time. Lack of evidence for poor outcomes leads us to infer that elevated peak SBP in this subgroup could more likely reflect an adaptive response to training, rather than a pathological outcome. Future studies should track clinical outcomes of those achieving elevated SBP and develop athlete-specific guidelines.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".