MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Insulin resistance without coexisting hyperglycaemia is not independently associated with cardiorespiratory fitness or its components in women

2023· article· en· W4388601118 on OpenAlexaff
A Rissanen, Johanna Rissanen, Maritta Pöyhönen‐Alho, Aila Tiitinen, Heikki Tikkanen, J. Kevin Shoemaker, Robert J. Petrella, Juha E. Peltonen

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Heart Journal · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular and exercise physiology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaWestern University
FundersBusiness FinlandOpetus- ja Kulttuuriministeriö
KeywordsMedicineCardiorespiratory fitnessCardiologyInternal medicineInsulin resistanceStroke volumeHeart rateCardiac outputBlood pressureBody mass indexInsulinVO2 maxImpedance cardiographyEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Insulin resistance (IR) is a globally prevalent condition in which tissues’ response to insulin is diminished. Cardiorespiratory fitness (peak O2 uptake (VO2peak)) is determined by Fick’s equation (VO2 = cardiac output (CO) × arteriovenous O2 difference (Ca-vO2) = heart rate × stroke volume (SV) × Ca-vO2) and diffusion law (VO2 = diffusive O2 conductance (DO2) × constant k × venous O2 pressure (PvO2)). Several studies suggest an association between IR and decreased VO2peak, but the association has been questioned by analyses taking account of body size and composition, and potential mechanisms behind the association are unknown. Purpose To test a hypothesis that IR is not independently associated with VO2peak or its components. Methods Fifty of 144 women, who had participated in baseline experiments of three intervention studies, were included in this retrospective cross-sectional study; see Table 1 for subject characteristics. The inclusion criteria were age 18-40 years, body mass index 18.5-40 kg/m2, Caucasian origin, and available data on key measures. The exclusion criteria were diseases, medications, and other factors possibly affecting VO2peak. We measured haemoglobin, fasting glucose, and fasting insulin concentrations (blood), assessed IR (homeostasis model assessment (HOMA-IR)), and measured body size and composition (bioimpedance). The subjects performed an incremental cycling test to volitional fatigue; we measured ventilatory gas exchange (spiroergometry), arterial O2 saturation (oximetry), and SV and CO (impedance cardiography), and calculated Ca-vO2, DO2, and PvO2. We analysed VO2peak and its components as absolute (e.g. L/min) and ratiometrically scaled values (e.g. mL/min/kg), and when appropriate, also as allometrically scaled values (e.g. mL/min/kg^x, where 0 < x < 1) after identifying optimal variable-specific exponents. Results VO2peak scaled to body mass (BM) as well as SVpeak and COpeak scaled to body surface area (BSA) were inversely associated with the body size variables they were scaled to (all P < 0.013). Contrariwise, this was not the case when we optimally scaled VO2peak to fat-free mass (FFM), SVpeak to FFM^0.55, COpeak to FFM^0.50, and DO2peak to FFM (all 0.066 < P < 0.977). HOMA-IR was inversely associated with VO2peak scaled to BM but not in a multivariate analysis, whereas HOMA-IR was not associated with VO2peak scaled to FFM (Table 2); we made alike observations with SVpeak and COpeak (data not shown). Further, VO2peak scaled to BM as well as SVpeak and COpeak scaled to BSA were or tended to be up to 15 % higher in a group with HOMA-IR<3.0 than in a group with HOMA-IR≥3.0, while other peak exercise data did not differ between the groups (Table 1). Conclusion Body size and composition significantly affect conclusions drawn regarding VO2peak and its components. Taking this into account, IR without coexisting hyperglycaemia is not independently associated with VO2peak or its components in women.Table 1Table 2

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.090
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.216 · 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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Heart JournalSame topicCardiovascular and exercise physiologyFrench-language works237,207