MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4414277913 · doi:10.1101/2025.09.11.675716

Cerebrovascular Responses to Static and Rhythmic Handgrip Exercises

2025· preprint· en· W4414277913 on OpenAlexaff
Elric Y. Allison, Yixue Mei, Huseyn A. Ismayilov, Geoff B. Coombs, Jeremy J. Walsh, Michael J Carter, Trevor J. King, Baraa K. Al‐Khazraji

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2025
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Health and Disease Prevention
Canadian institutionsMount Royal UniversityMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMiddle cerebral arteryBlood pressureHemodynamicsHeart rateRhythmCerebral blood flowCardiorespiratory fitnessBlood flow

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Handgrip exercise (HGE) is a safe, accessible exercise modality shown to improve cardiovascular health and is particularly promising for individuals with limited mobility who cannot engage in traditional exercise. Given that contraction type and intensity influence systemic cardiorespiratory variables that affect cerebral blood flow regulation, this study examined the acute systemic hemodynamic and cerebrovascular responses to static and rhythmic HGE protocols at varying intensities. Thirty-three healthy young adults (17 males; 16 females age 22(1) years) performed four separate 5-minute HGE protocols in a randomized order: static HGE at 15% (S15) of maximal voluntary contraction (MVC), static HGE at 30% MVC, rhythmic HGE at 30% MVC, rhythmic HGE at 60% (R60) MVC. We hypothesized that rhythmic HGE at higher intensities would produce the greatest cerebrovascular responses due to enhanced venous return and cardiac output, while static HGE at higher intensities would elicit the greatest systemic (i.e., blood pressure, HR, ventilation) responses. Cerebral (middle cerebral artery blood velocity [MCAv] and cerebrovascular conductance index [MCA CVCi ], internal carotid artery [ICA] diameter, velocity, blood flow, and shear rate) and systemic hemodynamics (systolic [SBP], diastolic [DBP], mean arterial pressure [MAP], heart rate [HR], cardiac output [CO]), and end-tidal carbon dioxide (PETCO 2 ) levels were averaged over the final 30s of each minute of exercise. There was a significant time and protocol interaction effect on HR (p<0.001). We found significant main effects of exercise protocol for MCAv (p<0.001), MCA CVCi (p<0.001), ICA diameter (p=0.01) and blood flow (p=0.001), and PETCO 2 (p=0.002). Greatest increases in MCAv alongside the largest reduction in ICA blood flow occurred in R60. The greatest increase in MCA CVCi and ICA blood flow (from baseline) occurred in R30 compared to other protocols. In addition to the greater cerebrovascular responses, we also observed more modest systemic responses (lower HR, MAP, CO) and lower self-reported ratings of perceived exertion (p<0.001) in R30 compared to other protocols. Acute increases in MCACVCi and ICA blood flow observed in R30 (despite the lower perceived effort) may suggest that rhythmic HGE at low-moderate intensities can be a tolerable prescription for inducing exercise-related cerebrovascular adaptations (i.e., improved cerebral perfusion) in populations that may require adapted physical activity.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.246 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)→Same topicCardiovascular Health and Disease Prevention→French-language works237,207→