Impact of two different periodized aerobic training on acute cerebrovascular response and cognitive performance in coronary heart disease patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study was to measure the effects of chronic and acute aerobic exercise at two different intensities on cognitive performance and cerebrovascular response in coronary heart disease (CHD) patients. Thirty-five CHD patients completed two exercise bouts at 30% and 70% of their respective peak aerobic power on an ergocycle while performing cognitive tasks, which included nonexecutive and executive conditions before and after a 3-month training intervention. Variations of oxy- deoxy- and total hemoglobin concentrations were measured on the left prefrontal cortex at both intensities using near-infrared spectroscopy. Aerobic exercise training consisted of linear and nonlinear periodization protocols for three sessions of 30-50 min per week for 12 weeks. Error rate (p < 0.001) and reaction time (p < 0.001) improved after the training program for the executive condition of the cognitive task, regardless of intensity and training groups. Cerebral oxygenation remained similar pre and post intervention for all conditions and acute exercise intensity. Despite the absence of conjunction between cerebral oxygenation and cognition, results suggest that both exercise training programs could improve cognition in CHD patients during acute exercise.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".