Differences in Heart Rate Variability and Baroreflex Sensitivity between Male and Female Athletes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Heart rate variability (HRV), systolic blood pressure variability (BPV), and spontaneous baroreflex sensitivity (BRS) are indirect and approximate measures of autonomic regulation of the cardiovascular system. Studies have shown differences in HRV and BRS between males and females; however, no study has observed differences in BPV, HRV, or BRS between male and female athletes. One hundred males (age 21.2 ± 2.1 y; BMI 27.4 ± 4.5 kg/m2) and sixty-five females (age: 19.7 ± 1.6 y; BMI 22.7 ± 2.2 kg/m2) were assessed during the pre-season baseline. We collected resting beat-to-beat blood pressure and R-R intervals using finger photoplethysmography and a 3-lead electrocardiogram, respectively. Participants underwent a controlled slow breathing protocol (six breaths/minute: 5 s inhale, 5 s exhale) for 5 min. Spectral and linear analysis was conducted on blood pressure and ECG data. Regression curves were fitted to the blood pressure and R-R signals, with the slopes providing the BRS parameters. Male athletes had significantly (p < 0.05) lower mean heart rate, RR interval SD2/SD1, HRV % low-frequency, and higher BP high-frequency power during controlled respiration. No differences were found in any BRS parameters. HRV and BPV responses to a slow breathing protocol differed between male and female athletes; however, BRS responses did not.
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 | 0.019 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".