MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3188623189 · doi:10.1139/apnm-2021-0265

Sex differences in physical and mental health following high-intensity interval training in adults with cardiovascular disease who completed cardiac rehabilitation

2021· article· en· W3188623189 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Sol Vidal‐Almela, Kimberley L. Way, Tasuku Terada, Heather Tulloch, Marja-Leena Keast, Andrew Pipe, Daniele Chirico, Jennifer L. Reed

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Physiology Nutrition and Metabolism · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Health and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsInstitut du Savoir MontfortTotal (Canada)Montfort HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineWaistInterval trainingInternal medicineBlood pressureHeart rateBody mass indexAerobic exerciseAnxietyHigh-intensity interval trainingCardiologyPhysical therapyEndocrinologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This pre-post study examined sex-differences in peak aerobic power (V̇O2peak) and physical- and mental-health outcomes in adults with cardiovascular disease who completed high-intensity interval training (HIIT)-based cardiac rehabilitation. HIIT consisted of 25 minutes of alternating higher- (4×4 minutes 85–95% heart rate peak (HRpeak)) and lower- (3×3 minutes 60–70% HRpeak) intensity intervals twice weekly for 10 weeks. V̇O2peak estimated from a graded exercise test using the American College of Sports Medicine equation, body mass index (BMI), waist circumference, blood pressure, blood biomarkers and anxiety and depression were assessed at baseline and follow-up. Linear mixed-effects models for repeated measures were performed to examine differences over time between sexes. Of 140 participants (mean ± standard deviation: 58 ± 9 years), 40 were female. Improvements in V̇O2peak did not differ between sexes (interaction: p = 0.273, females: 28.4 ± 6.4 to 30.9 ± 7.6; males: 34.3 ± 6.3 to 37.4 ± 6.0 mL/kg/min). None of the time by sex interactions were significant. Significant main effects of time showed reductions in waist circumference, triglycerides, low-density lipoprotein (LDL), total cholesterol (TC)/high-density lipoprotein (HDL) and anxiety, and increases in V̇O2peak and HDL from baseline to follow-up. Significant main effects of sex revealed smaller V̇O2peak, BMI and waist circumference, and higher LDL, TC and HDL in females than males. HIIT led to similar improvements in estimated V̇O2peak (females: 8.8%, males: 9.0%) and additional health outcomes between sexes. Novelty: HIIT-based cardiac rehabilitation led to similar improvements in estimated V̇O2peak and other physical and mental health outcomes between sexes. The number of sessions attended was high (>70%) and did not differ by sex. Both sexes showed good compliance with the exercise protocol (HR target).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.254 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations14
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied Physiology Nutrition and Metabolism→Same topicCardiac Health and Mental Health→French-language works237,207→