Reduced tidal volume-inflection point and elevated operating lung volumes during exercise in females with well-controlled asthma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction Individuals with asthma breathe at higher operating lung volumes during exercise compared with healthy individuals, which contributes to increased exertional dyspnoea. In health, females are more likely to develop exertional dyspnoea than males at a given workload or ventilation, and therefore, it is possible that females with asthma may develop disproportional dyspnoea on exertion. The purpose of this study was to compare operating lung volume and dyspnoea responses during exercise in females with and without asthma. Methods Sixteen female controls and 16 females with asthma were recruited for the study along with 16 male controls and 16 males with asthma as a comparison group. Asthma was confirmed using American Thoracic Society criteria. Participants completed a cycle ergometry cardiopulmonary exercise test to volitional exhaustion. Inspiratory capacity manoeuvres were performed to estimate inspiratory reserve volume (IRV) and dyspnoea was evaluated using the Modified Borg Scale. Results Females with asthma exhibited elevated dyspnoea during submaximal exercise compared with female controls (p<0.05). Females with asthma obtained a similar IRV and dyspnoea at peak exercise compared with healthy females despite lower ventilatory demand, suggesting mechanical constraint to tidal volume (VT) expansion. VT-inflection point was observed at significantly lower ventilation and V̇O2 in females with asthma compared with female controls. Forced expired volume in 1 s was significantly associated with VT-inflection point in females with asthma (R2=0.401; p<0.01) but not female controls (R2=0.002; p=0.88). Conclusion These results suggest that females with asthma are more prone to experience exertional dyspnoea, secondary to dynamic mechanical constraints during submaximal exercise when compared with females without asthma.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".