MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4214491222 · doi:10.1113/ep090159

Directional sensitivity of the cerebral pressure–flow relationship in young healthy individuals trained in endurance and resistance exercise

2022· article· en· W4214491222 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueExperimental Physiology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular Disturbances
Canadian institutionsHotchkiss Brain InstituteCalgary Laboratory ServicesUniversity of CalgaryUniversité LavalInstitut universitaire de cardiologie et de pneumologie de Québec
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCerebral autoregulationMiddle cerebral arteryCerebral blood flowMean arterial pressureResistance trainingBlood pressureAutoregulationCerebral arteries

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

New Findings What is the central question of this study? Does habitual exercise modality affect the directionality of the cerebral pressure–flow relationship? What is the main finding and its importance? These data suggest the hysteresis‐like pattern of dynamic cerebral autoregulation appears present in long‐term sedentary and endurance‐trained individuals, but absent in resistance‐trained individuals. This is the first study to expand knowledge on the directional sensitivity of the cerebral pressure–flow relationship to trained populations. Abstract Evidence suggests the cerebrovasculature may be more efficient at dampening cerebral blood flow (CBF) variations when mean arterial pressure (MAP) transiently increases, compared to when it decreases. Despite divergent MAP and CBF responses to acute endurance and resistance training, the long‐term impact of habitual exercise modality on the directionality of dynamic cerebral autoregulation (dCA) is currently unknown. Thirty‐six young healthy participants (sedentary ( n = 12), endurance‐trained ( n = 12), and resistance‐trained ( n = 12)) undertook a 5‐min repeated squat–stand protocol at two forced MAP oscillation frequencies (0.05 and 0.10 Hz). Middle cerebral artery mean blood velocity (MCAv) and MAP were continuously monitored. We calculated absolute (ΔMCAv T /ΔMAP T ) and relative (%MCAv T /%MAP T ) changes in MCAv and MAP with respect to the transition time intervals of both variables to compute a time‐adjusted ratio in each MAP direction, averaged over the 5‐min repeated squat–stand protocols. At 0.10 Hz repeated squat–stands, ΔMCAv T /ΔMAP T and %MCAv T /%MAP T were lower when MAP increased compared with when MAP decreased for sedentary (ΔMCAv T /ΔMAP T : P = 0.032; %MCAv T /%MAP T : P = 0.040) and endurance‐trained individuals (ΔMCAv T /ΔMAP T : P = 0.012; %MCAv T /%MAP T P = 0.007), but not in the resistance‐trained individuals (ΔMCAv T /ΔMAP T : P = 0.512; %MCAv T /%MAP T P = 0.666). At 0.05 Hz repeated squat–stands, time‐adjusted ratios were similar for all groups (all P > 0.605). These findings suggest exercise training modality does influence the directionality of the cerebral pressure–flow relationship and support the presence of a hysteresis‐like pattern during 0.10 Hz repeated squat–stands in sedentary and endurance‐trained participants, but not in resistance‐trained individuals. In future studies, assessment of elite endurance and resistance training habits may further elucidate modality‐dependent discrepancies on directional dCA measurements.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.452
Threshold uncertainty score0.306

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.254 · 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