MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200005817 · doi:10.1113/jp282000

Short‐term exercise‐induced protection of cardiovascular function and health: why and how fast does the heart benefit from exercise?

2021· article· en· W4200005817 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Physiology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Ischemia and Reperfusion
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsIschemiaCardioprotectionCardiovascular physiologyCardiac function curveAnimal studiesCardiac ischemiaSignalling pathwaysEffector

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Regular exercise training has potent and powerful protective effects against the development of cardiovascular disease. These cardioprotective effects of regular exercise training are partly explained through the effects of exercise on traditional cardiovascular risk factors and improvement in cardiac and vascular health, which take several weeks to months to develop. This review focuses on the observation that single bouts of exercise may also possess an underrecognized, clinically useful form of immediate cardioprotection. Studies, performed in both animals and humans, demonstrate that single or short-term exercise-induced protection (SEP) attenuates the magnitude of cardiac and/or vascular damage in response to prolonged ischaemia and reperfusion injury. This review highlights preclinical evidence supporting the hypothesis that SEP activates multiple pathways to confer immediate protection against ischaemic events, reduce the severity of potentially lethal ischaemic myocardial injury, and therefore act as a physiological first line of defence against injury. Given the fact that the extent of SEP could be modulated by exercise-related and subject-related factors, it is important to recognize and consider these factors to optimize future clinical implications of SEP. This review also summarizes potential effector signalling pathways (i.e. communication between exercising muscles to vascular/cardiac tissue) and intracellular pathways (i.e. reducing tissue damage) that ultimately confer protection against cardiac and vascular injury. Finally, we discuss potential future directions for designing adequate human and animal studies that will support developing effective SEP strategies for the (multi-)diseased and aged individual. KEY POINTS: Single or short-term exercise-induced protection (SEP) attenuates the magnitude of cardiac and/or vascular damage in response to prolonged ischaemia and reperfusion injury (IR injury). SEP activates multiple pathways to confer cardiac protection, which develops remotely at the site of the activated muscle by release of circulating molecules, which transfer towards activation of intramyocardial signalling that promotes cell survival during episodes of IR injury. SEP represents an attractive intervention in aged individuals and in those with co-morbidities. The immediate protection, low cost and simplicity to increase the 'dose' of SEP offers unique opportunities in the clinical applications of SEP.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.225 · 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

Citations24
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of PhysiologySame topicCardiac Ischemia and ReperfusionFrench-language works237,207