The impact of Beta Blockade on cardio-respiratory system and symptoms during exercise
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Beta-blocking drugs(BB) reduce cardiac work and prolong life in patients with cardiovascular dysfunction. VO2= HR x Stroke Volume x a-vO2 difference. Research questions: Do BB reduce the capacity to exercise, maximal power output(MPO), VO2 max, and increase the perceived effort required to cycle and breath during exercise? Methods: Retrospective observational study of 42,771 subjects performing incremental cycle ergometry to capacity. Subjects were divided by BB usage. Baseline and exercise physiological characteristics and perceived exertion were compared. Forward stepwise linear additive regression was performed with MPO as the dependent factor and height, age, sex, muscle strength, HR max, VO2/HR, FEV1 and DLCO as independent contributors. Results: 7,787 were receiving BB compared to 34,984 not receiving BB. MPO was modestly higher in those receiving BB(751 vs 794 kpm/min p<0.0001). HR was reduced by 18.27%(18.15-18.38 95% CI) (p<0.0001) while VO2/HR was increased by 19.5%(19.3-19.7 95% CI). The effort required to cycle and breathe(Borg 0-10) was not significantly increased by BB. Maximum HR was second only to quadriceps strength in contributing to MPO: MPO =-350+9.82*Quads(kg)+5.11*HRmax+73BB (r=0.7981) Interpretation: Increases in O2 pulse minimize the reduction in exercise intolerance associated with BB in practice. BB limit oxygen delivery in those unable to increase their O2 Pulse (SV X HR X a-vO2 diff).
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".