MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Endothelial Sensitivity to Exercise‐Induced Shear Rate in Pre‐ and Post‐Menopausal Females and in Males

2022· article· en· W4225421414 on OpenAlexafffund
Amélie Debray, Nicholas Ravanelli, Hugo Gravel, Audrey‐Ann Bartlett, Charlotte W. Usselman, Louis Bherer, Daniel Gagnon

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Health and Disease Prevention
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversité de MontréalLakehead UniversityMontreal Heart Institute
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsInternal medicineMedicineSensitivity (control systems)Post menopausalCardiologyEndocrinologyMenopauseEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND Post‐menopausal females appear resistant to the beneficial effects of exercise on endothelial function. Repeated increases in shear stress are considered important mediators of exercise‐induced improvements in endothelial function. It is therefore possible that endothelial sensitivity to shear stress is reduced in post‐menopausal females, thereby blunting endothelial adaptations to exercise training. The objective of this retrospective analysis was to test the hypothesis that post‐menopausal females exhibit a lower endothelial sensitivity to exercise‐induced shear rate relative to pre‐menopausal females and age‐matched males. METHODS Five pre‐ (48 ± 1 yrs) and fifteen post‐ (65 ± 10 yrs) menopausal females, and five males (67 ± 5 yrs) performed 4‐min rhythmic handgrip exercise bouts. Ten participants (6 post and 6 males) exercised at 20%, 40%, 60% and 80% of maximal voluntary contraction, and 15 participants (5 pre, 9 post and 2 males) exercised at 3 kg, 6 kg and 9 kg. The contraction/relaxation cycle was 2‐sec/3‐sec and each bout was separated by 10 min of rest. Brachial artery diameter and blood velocity were measured using high‐resolution ultrasound and analyzed using edge‐detection software. Endothelial sensitivity to exercise‐induced shear rate was quantified as the slope of the relationship between brachial artery dilation (% change from baseline) and shear rate (in s ‐1 ). RESULTS Baseline diameter was greater in males (4.68 ± 0.55 mm) compared with post‐ (3.24 ± 0.53 mm, p<0.01) and pre‐ (3.55 ± 0.19 mm, p<0.01) menopausal females. The rhythmic handgrip protocols elicited net shear rates that ranged between 38 s ‐1 and 392 s ‐1 . A positive correlation was observed between brachial artery dilation and net shear rate in males (r=0.66, p<0.01), and post‐menopausal females (r=0.38; p<0.01), but not in pre‐menopausal females (r=‐0.25, p=0.36). Endothelial sensitivity to exercise‐induced shear rate did not differ between pre‐ (0.037 ± 0.120 %/s ‐1 )and post‐ (0.069 ± 0.081 %/s ‐1 , p>0.99) menopausal females, between pre‐menopausal females (0.037 ± 0.120 %/s ‐1 )and males (0.027 ± 0.055 %/s ‐1 , p>0.99), or between post‐menopausal females (0.069 ± 0.081 %/s ‐1 ) and males (0.027 ± 0.055 %/s ‐1 , p>0.99). CONCLUSION These results suggest that post‐menopausal females do not demonstrate a reduced endothelial sensitivity to exercise‐induced shear rate compared with pre‐menopausal females as well as with males of similar age.

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)0.000
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.261 · 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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB Journal→Same topicCardiovascular Health and Disease Prevention→French-language works237,207→