Fitness Level‐ and Sex-Related Differences in Macrovascular and Microvascular Responses during Reactive Hyperemia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Reactive hyperemia (RH) is widely used for the investigation of macrovascular (flow-mediated dilation, or FMD) and microvascular (near-infrared spectroscopy-vascular occlusion test, or NIRS-VOT) function. Mixed results have been reported on fitness level- and sex-related differences in FMD outcomes, and little is known about microvascular differences in untrained and chronically trained males and females. METHODS: Fifteen chronically trained (CT: 8 males, 7 females) and 16 untrained (UT: 8 males, 8 females) individuals participated in this study. Aerobic fitness (V˙O2max) was assessed during a cycling incremental exercise test to volitional exhaustion. FMD and NIRS-VOT were performed simultaneously on the lower limb investigating superficial femoral artery and vastus lateralis muscle, respectively. RESULTS: %FMD was not different between groups (CT males, 4.62 ± 1.42; CT females, 4.15 ± 2.23; UT males, 5.10 ± 2.53; CT females, 3.20 ± 1.67). Peak blood flow showed greater values in CT versus UT (P ≤ 0.0001) and males versus females (P = 0.032). RH blood flow area under the curve was greater in CT versus UT (P = 0.001). At the microvascular level, desaturation and reperfusion rates were faster in CT versus UT (P = 0.018 and P = 0.013) and males versus females (P = 0.011 and P = 0.005). V˙O2max was significantly correlated with reperfusion rate (P = 0.0005) but not with %FMD. CONCLUSIONS: Whereas NIRS-VOT outcomes identified fitness- and sex-related differences in vascular responses, %FMD did not. However, when RH-related outcomes from the FMD analysis were considered, fitness- and/or sex-related differences were detected. These data highlight the importance of integrating FMD and NIRS-VOT outcomes for a more comprehensive evaluation of vascular 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 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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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".