The influence of menopause and cardiorespiratory fitness on lipoprotein particles in midlife women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lipoprotein particles may provide better information about cardiovascular risk than standard cholesterol measures for women. Whether lipoprotein subclasses change with menopausal stage is unclear. Given the high prevalence of low cardiorespiratory fitness in midlife women and benefit of cardiovascular disease risk, it is also important to understand the effect of fitness on lipoprotein profiles. This study evaluated the influence of menopausal status and fitness on lipoprotein particles in healthy midlife women. Lipoprotein particles were measured in high- (n = 25) and low- (n = 13) fit perimenopausal and late postmenopausal women, and in high-fit premenopausal (n = 10), perimenopausal (n = 12), and late postmenopausal women (n = 13). There were larger low-density lipoprotein particles (LDL-P; 21.7 ± 0.06 vs. 21.3 ± 0.1 nm, p = 0.002), more large LDL-P (623.1 ± 32.8 vs. 500.2 ± 52.6 nmol/L, p = 0.045), and fewer small LDL-P (145.5 ± 31.4 vs. 311.5 ± 44.7 nmol/L, p = 0.001) in the high-fit group vs. the low-fit group. High-density lipoprotein particles (HDL-P) were larger (10.1 ± 0.1 vs. 9.7 ± 0.1 nm, p = 0.002) in the high-fit group, with more large (14.8 ± 0.7 vs. 11.0 ± 0.9 μmol/L, p = 0.002), medium (12.9 ± 0.8 vs. 8.4 ± 0.9 μmol/L, p = 0.002) HDL-P, and fewer small HDL-P (10.2 ± 1.1 vs. 15.4 ± 1.6 μmol/L, p = 0.009) compared with the low-fit group. High-fit postmenopausal women had more large LDL-P (662.9 ± 47.5 nmol/L) compared with premenopausal women (479.1 ± 52.6 nmol/L, p = 0.035), and more HDL-P (40.2 ± 1.1 µmol/L) compared with premenopausal (34.9 ± 1.5 μmol/L, p = 0.023) and perimenopausal women (35.4 ± 1.3 μmol/L, p = 0.033). High fitness positively influences lipoprotein particles in healthy perimenopausal and late postmenopausal women. In healthy fit women, menopause may not have a large influence on lipoprotein particles. Novelty: In highly fit women, menopause may not have a negative influence on lipoprotein particle subclasses. High fitness is associated with a less atherogenic lipoprotein profile in perimenopausal and late postmenopausal women.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".