Sex dimorphism in cardiac and aerobic capacities: The influence of body composition
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Objective The contribution of body composition to sex differences in strong prognostic cardiorespiratory variables remains unresolved. This study aimed to elucidate whether body composition determines sex differences in cardiac and oxygen (O 2 ) uptake responses to incremental exercise. Methods Healthy, moderately active women and men ( n = 60, age = 60.7 [12.3] years) matched by age and cardiorespiratory fitness were included. Body composition was determined via dual‐energy x‐ray absorptiometry. Transthoracic echocardiography and O 2 uptake were assessed at rest and throughout incremental exercise with established methods. Major cardiac and pulmonary outcomes were normalized by body surface area (BSA), total lean body mass (LBM), or leg LBM. Results Women presented with smaller anthropometrical indices (height, weight, BSA) and LBM compared with men ( p < 0.001). Peak exercise cardiac dimensions and output (i.e., peak cardiac outout [Q peak ]), commonly normalized by BSA, were reduced in women relative to men ( p ≤ 0.019). Cardiac sex differences were abolished after normalization by total or leg LBM ( p ≥ 0.115). Strong linear relationships of total and leg LBM with Q peak and peak oxygen uptake were detected exclusively in women ( r ≥ 0.53, p ≤ 0.003), independent of body fat percentage. Conclusions Total and leg LBM stand out as strong independent determinants of cardiac and aerobic capacities in women, regardless of body fat percentage, relationships that are not present in age‐ and fitness‐matched men.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".