Biological sex does not influence the peak cardiac output response to twelve weeks of sprint interval training
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Sprint interval training (SIT) increases peak oxygen uptake (V̇O2peak) but the mechanistic basis is unclear. We have reported that 12 wk of SIT increased V̇O2peak and peak cardiac output (Q̇peak) and the changes in these variables were correlated. An exploratory analysis suggested that Q̇peak increased in males but not females. The present study incorporated best practices to examine the potential influence of biological sex on the Q̇peak response to SIT. Male and female participants (n = 10 each; 21 ± 4 y) performed 33 ± 2 sessions of SIT over 12 wk. Each 10-min session involved 3 × 20-s ‘all-out’ sprints on an ergometer. V̇O2peak increased after SIT (3.16 ± 1.0 vs. 2.89 ± 1.0 L/min, η2p = 0.53, p < 0.001) with no sex × time interaction (p = 0.61). Q̇peak was unchanged after training (15.2 ± 3.3 vs. 15.1 ± 3.0 L/min, p = 0.85), in contrast to our previous study. The peak estimated arteriovenous oxygen difference increased after training (204 ± 30 vs. 187 ± 36 ml/L, p = 0.006). There was no effect of training or sex on measures of endothelial function. We conclude that 12 wk of SIT increases V̇O2peak but the mechanistic basis remains unclear. The capacity of inert gas rebreathing to assess changes in Q̇peak may be limited and invasive studies that use more direct measures are needed.
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) | 0.003 | 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".