A brief morning rest period benefits cardiac repair in pressure overload hypertrophy and postmyocardial infarction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Rest has long been considered beneficial to patient healing; however, remarkably, there are no evidence-based experimental models determining how it benefits disease outcomes. Here, we created an experimental rest model in mice that briefly extends the morning rest period. We found in 2 major cardiovascular disease conditions (cardiac hypertrophy, myocardial infarction) that imposing a short, extended period of morning rest each day limited cardiac remodeling compared with controls. Mechanistically, rest mitigates autonomic-mediated hemodynamic stress on the cardiovascular system, relaxes myofilament contractility, and attenuates cardiac remodeling genes, consistent with the benefits on cardiac structure and function. These same rest-responsive gene pathways underlie the pathophysiology of many major human cardiovascular conditions, as demonstrated by interrogating open-source transcriptomic data; thus, patients with other conditions may also benefit from a morning rest period in a similar manner. Our findings implicate rest as a key driver of physiology, creating a potentially new field - as broad and important as diet, sleep, or exercise - and provide a strong rationale for investigation of rest-based therapy for major clinical diseases.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".