High-intensity Interval Training And Ambulatory Blood Pressure In Women With Hypertension And Type 2 Diabetes.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Previous results from our group and others reported that low-volume HIIT (6-10 x 1 min) was insufficient to improve ambulatory blood pressure (ABP) in older women with type 2 diabetes (T2D). Nevertheless, a reduction of systolic 24-hour ABP was noticed after higher volume HIIT (4 x 4 min) in middle-aged adults with hypertension. It is therefore possible that the interval duration or volume are important HIIT parameters that should be considered for hypertension management. PURPOSE: To evaluate the acute effect of interval protocol/duration on 24-hour ABP monitoring in older women with hypertension and T2D. METHODS: Preliminary data from 10 women (65-85 years) with hypertension and T2D who completed three experimental conditions were analyzed: 1) REST (seated control); 2) HIIT10 (10 x 1 min at 90% maximum heart rate [HRmax]) and 3) HIIT4 (4 x 4 min at 90% HRmax). Workload-matched HIIT4 and HIIT10 sessions were randomly performed. After each experimental condition, 24-hour ABP was monitored in controlled conditions (4 h) at the lab and for 20 h while participants continued their habitual daily activities. RESULTS: Preliminary results showed that throughout the 4-hour controlled period, only the 5-min systolic BP measured after HIIT10 (117 ± 17 mmHg) and HIIT4 (109 ± 10 mmHg) was lower compared to REST (123 ± 14 mmHg) (p = 0.043 and p = 0.003, respectively). A reduction of the 24-hour systolic ABP was observed after HIIT10 compared to REST (mean difference [95%CI]: -3.7 [-7.7 - 0.3], p = 0.024), while the difference between HIIT4 and REST was not statistically significant (-1.2 [-6.0 - 3.5]; p = 0.47). Diastolic ABP (HIIT10 vs. REST: -1.8 [-3.9 - 0.4] mmHg, p = 0.097; HIIT4 vs. REST: -0.1 [-2.7 - 2.5] mmHg; p = 0.921) and nocturnal dipping (HIIT10 vs. REST: 0.9 [-3.7 - 5.4] %, p = 0.626; HIIT4 vs. REST: 2.4 [-1.1 - 5.8] %; p = 0.160) were not significantly modified by either HIIT protocol. CONCLUSION: Contrary to our hypothesis, preliminary results only reveal a minor reduction in 24-hour systolic ABP after HIIT10 in older women with hypertension and T2D. Neither HIIT4 nor HIIT10 was sufficient to impact 24-hour diastolic ABP or nocturnal dipping. Supported by Diabète Québec and CEUS DOCC.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".