How Do Sex and Cardiorespiratory Fitness Impact Pulmonary Diffusing Capacity?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Physiological outcomes, like pulmonary diffusing capacity, can be impacted by non-modifiable ( e.g. , biological sex) and modifiable ( e.g. , cardiorespiratory fitness) factors. The quantification of potential combined, interactive effects of these factors remains unreported in the literature. PURPOSE: This study aimed to examine the independent and combined associations of sex and cardiorespiratory fitness ( V̇ O 2peak ) with pulmonary diffusing capacity (DL CO ) and its determinants (capillary blood volume, V C ; and membrane diffusing capacity, D M ) at rest and during exercise, while controlling for lung size. METHODS: This retrospective study utilized general linear regression and linear mixed effects modeling to evaluate DL CO (adjusted for hemoglobin) and its determinants at rest and during exercise in n = 113 participants (57 female). RESULTS: Sex, V̇ O 2peak , and alveolar volume (V A ) all showed significant bivariate associations with diffusing capacity of the lung for carbon monoxide (DL CO ) when tested separately (all P < 0.001). In our final model, after accounting for V A , only sex remained significantly associated with resting DL CO ( P = 0.047), whereas V̇ O 2peak was associated with resting V C ( P = 0.009). No significant interaction effects were detected for resting data. After accounting for V A , exercise DL CO was significantly associated with sex but not V̇ O 2peak ( P < 0.001). A significant sex* V̇ O 2peak *intensity interaction was detected in exercise DL CO whereby individuals with higher V̇ O 2peak have greater exercise DL CO , and trained males have a greater DL CO compared with trained females ( Pinteraction < 0.001; males, P < 0.001; females, P < 0.001). Exercise V C was not associated with V̇ O 2peak or sex after accounting for V A , but a significant sex* V̇ O 2peak *intensity interaction effect on exercise V C was detected ( Pinteraction = 0.009; males, P = 0.039; females, P = 0.298). CONCLUSIONS: By examining the independent and combined associations of sex and V̇ O 2peak with DL CO and its determinants, our findings identified that the DL CO response to exercise is modified by the combined effects of sex and fitness.
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 | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".