The Cardiovascular Conundrum in Ethnic and Sexual Minorities: A Potential Biomarker of Constant Coping With Discrimination
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: A paradoxical profile of greater elevated sympathetic vasoconstriction (increased total peripheral resistance, TPR) and increased vagally-mediated heart rate variability (HRV) -the so-called Cardiovascular Conundrum- has been reported in African Americans (AAs) both at rest and in response to orthostasis. Whereas some authors have attributed this pattern to genetic factors, others have pointed to the potential role of coping with repeated racial discrimination. Objective: To disentangle between these alternative explanations, we have examined the hemodynamic profile of another population that is likely to be exposed to episodes of discrimination, i.e., sexual minorities. Methods: The first study was conducted on a sample of AAs and European Americans (EAs) with the aim of replicating previous results on the Cardiovascular Conundrum. In the second study, lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) people, matched by age and sex with heterosexual participants, underwent a hemodynamic and autonomic assessment at rest and during an emotional (in the experimental group, both LGB-related and non LGB related), and a cognitive stressor. Results: The first study confirmed a pattern of higher resting HRV, paired with higher TPR, in AAs compared to EAs. In the second study, compared to heterosexuals, the LGB group showed the Cardiovascular Conundrum pattern, characterized by greater HRV and higher TPR at baseline and a more vascular hemodynamic profile and prominent compensation deficit in response to both tasks, and particularly during the LGB-related emotional task. However, in LGB only, the vascular response was negatively correlated with perceived discrimination. Conclusion: Present preliminary results are discussed in terms of maladaptive physiological consequences of exposure to chronic stress and the chronic use of dysfunctional emotion regulation strategies such as suppression.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".