Diabetes Abolishes the Cardioprotective Effect of Estrogen on Systolic Cardiac Function
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present study evaluated the role of female sex hormones on the adverse effects of diabetes in cardiac function. Adult female Sprague‐Dawley rats (10 weeks‐old) were submitted to ovariectomy. One week later, diabetes was induced with a single dose of streptozotocin (65 mg/kg, i.p) without insulin replacement. After 4 weeks cardiac function was evaluated by echocardiography (Vevo 2100, VisualSonics, Toronto, Ontario, Canada) in intact controls (CTL); diabetics (STZ); ovariectomized (OVX); and OVX with diabetes (OVX‐STZ). Diabetes and OVX alone or in combination did not affect systolic blood pressure. While OVX animals exhibited a higher LV weight: tibia length ratio (LVW/TL; 18%; vs CTL; p<0.05), LVW/TL was particularly reduced in the diabetic animals (STZ: 14%; OVX‐STZ: 11%; vs CTL; p<0.05). However, the relative wall thickness was decreased in OVX and diabetic animals (STZ: 21%; OVX: 18%; OVX‐STZ: 21%; vs CTL; p<0.05). The ejection fraction (EF) and fractional shortening (FS) were decreased in OVX, respectively (65% ± 1% vs 72 % ± 2% in CTL; 37± 1% vs 43 ± 2% in CTL). The systolic function was markedly reduced by the same magnitude in both STZ (EF: 66± 1%; FS: 38 % ± 1%) and OVX‐STZ (EF: 65± 2%; FS: 37± 1%) relative to CTL. These data indicate that diabetes removes the cardioprotective effect of estrogen on cardiac function independently of alterations in blood pressure.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".