Sympathetic neural responses in heart failure during exercise and after exercise training
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The sympathetic nervous system coordinates the cardiovascular response to exercise. This regulation is impaired in both experimental and human heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), resulting in a state of sympathoexcitation which limits exercise capacity and contributes to adverse outcome. Exercise training can moderate sympathetic excess at rest. Recording sympathetic nerve firing during exercise is more challenging. Hence, data acquired during exercise are scant and results vary according to exercise modality. In this review we will: (1) describe sympathetic activity during various exercise modes in both experimental and human HFrEF and consider factors which influence these responses; and (2) summarise the effect of exercise training on sympathetic outflow both at rest and during exercise in both animal models and human HFrEF. We will particularly highlight studies in humans which report direct measurements of efferent sympathetic nerve traffic using intraneural recordings. Future research is required to clarify the neural afferent mechanisms which contribute to efferent sympathetic activation during exercise in HFrEF, how this may be altered by exercise training, and the impact of such attenuation on cardiac and renal function.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".