Early life stress and autonomic response to acute mental stress in individuals with coronary heart disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Early life stress (ELS) has been associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular disease. We examined whether ELS was associated with autonomic function and stress reactivity among individuals with coronary heart disease (CHD). We included patients with stable CHD from two parallel studies, the Mental Stress Ischemia Prognosis Study (MIPS) and the Myocardial Infarction and Mental Stress Study 2 (MIMS2), and assessed ELS using the Early Trauma Inventory–Self‐Report–Short Form. Participants underwent a laboratory‐based mental stress task while undergoing ambulatory electrocardiographic monitoring. We used multivariate linear regression models to estimate the associations between ELS and heart rate variability (HRV; low frequency [LF], high frequency [HF], and LF and HF [LH] ratio). The analytic sample included 405 MIPS and 284 MIMS2 participants. Most participants endorsed at least one experience of ELS (92.2%). Although we did not observe associations between ELS and HRV outcomes in the overall sample, ELS was associated with lower LH ratio HRV during recovery in the posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) subgroup, ELS x PTSD interaction, p = .041. In the MIMS2 subgroup, ELS was associated with lower resting period LF HRV, = −0.16 ln ms2; 95% CI [−0.31, −0.02]. Exposure to physical trauma was associated with decreased HF HRV overall reactivity only among participants with high to moderate depressive symptoms, = −0.52 ln ms2 vs. = 0.01 ln ms2, p = .013. Overall, heterogeneous associations between ELS and HRV emerged, suggesting the need for additional research regarding longer‐term ambulatory HRV.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".