Sex-specific effects of frailty on cardiac structure and function: insights from preclinical models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Advanced age is an independent risk factor for cardiovascular diseases in both sexes. This is thought to be due, in part, to age-dependent cellular, structural, and functional changes in the heart, a process known as cardiac aging. An emerging view is that cardiac aging leads to the accumulation of cellular and subcellular deficits that increase susceptibility to cardiovascular diseases. Still, people age at different rates, with those aging rapidly considered frail. Evidence suggests that frailty, rather than simply age, is a major risk factor for cardiovascular disease and predicts adverse outcomes in those affected. Recent studies in mouse models of frailty show that many adverse changes associated with cardiac aging are more prominent in mice with a high degree of frailty. This suggests that frailty sets the stage for late life cardiovascular diseases to flourish and raises the possibility that treating frailty may treat cardiovascular diseases. These studies show that ventricular dysfunction increases with frailty in males only, whereas atrial dysfunction increases with frailty in both sexes. These results may shed light on the reasons that men and women can be susceptible to different cardiovascular diseases as they age, and why frail individuals are especially vulnerable to these disorders.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".