MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4417033984 · doi:10.1249/mss.0000000000003915

Exercise Above Critical Power Elicits Greater Post-Exercise Hypotension than Heavy Exercise Performed to Task Failure

2025· article· en· W4417033984 on OpenAlexaff
Tze‐Huan Lei, Sun Joon Bai, Blake G. Perry, Toby Mündel, Narihiko Kondo, Naoto Fujii, I‐Lin Wang, Richie P. Goulding

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular and exercise physiology
Canadian institutionsBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTask (project management)Power (physics)Magnitude (astronomy)Heart failureKey (lock)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: We have previously shown that critical power (CP) is a key threshold determining the magnitude of post-exercise hypotension (PEH); however, whether this finding depended upon 1) the attainment of task failure or 2) could be augmented by increasing exercise duration above CP remained unclear. PURPOSE: To determine 1) whether a similar magnitude of PEH would occur after exhaustive heavy versus supra-CP exercise, and 2) whether the magnitude of PEH depended upon exercise duration above CP. METHODS: Eighteen healthy participants (14 males and 4 females) performed 3 criterion trials involving exercise performed to task failure at power outputs that elicited exhaustion in either 6 min ( WR6 ), 12 min ( WR12 ), or at a heavy intensity (50%ΔGET-CP, halfway between the gas exchange threshold [GET] and CP) and all were followed by 60 min of seated recovery. RESULTS: Although time to exhaustion was greatest in 50%ΔGET-CP (2606 ± 732 s) versus WR12 (790 ± 67 s) and WR6 (397 ± 42 s, P < 0.001), the magnitude of PEH, as indicated by the change in mean arterial pressure (MAP) from baseline ( WR6 vs 50%ΔGET-CP: -12.9 ± 3.3 mm Hg vs -9.4 ± 3.6 mm Hg; WR12 vs 50%ΔGET-CP: -12.8 ± 3.7 mm Hg vs -9.4 ± 3.6 mm Hg, main effect P < 0.01) was greater in WR6 and WR12 than 50%ΔGET-CP (all P < 0.05). However, the changes in MAP were not different between WR6 and WR12 ( P = 0.90). CONCLUSIONS: These findings reinforce the notion that CP is a key threshold determining the magnitude of PEH. Specifically, the magnitude of PEH after exhaustive supra-CP exercise remained greater than heavy exercise when the heavy bout was performed to task failure.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

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)0.0020.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.270 · 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 venueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise→Same topicCardiovascular and exercise physiology→French-language works237,207→