Sex differences in the cardiovascular and ventilatory responses to arm or leg mechanoreflex activation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The mechanoreflex mediates the initial cardiorespiratory response during dynamic exercise, via input from the mechanical deformation of the exercising muscle. In response to passive movement (PM), engaging a greater number of limbs elicits a higher heart rate response. Additionally, males have larger pressor responses to arm PM; however, no sex differences exist in the pressor response to leg PM. Considering that the legs are a larger muscle mass and the pressor response to leg PM was not different between sexes, this may suggest inherent limb-dependant differences. This study aimed to determine sex differences and the role of limb volume and muscle strength on the cardiorespiratory responses to arm and leg PM. Females were smaller (i.e., stature, limb volume), less fit and had weaker handgrip strength compared to males (all p < 0.05); although, both sexes had similar plantarflexion strength (p = 0.3). During arm PM, only males experienced an increased MAP response to arm PM (p < 0.001), compared to females (p < 0.05); however, this sex difference was eliminated when accounting for disparities in forearm volume. Males and females had similar cardiorespiratory responses to leg PM (all p > 0.05). Further, greater plantarflexion strength enhanced the ventilatory response to leg PM in both sexes (p = 0.024). Based on covariate analysis, differences in limb volume and muscle strength contributed almost half of the variability in the cardiorespiratory responses to arm or leg PM. Contrary to our hypotheses, the results of the current study suggest that the previously observed sex and limb-dependant differences were influenced by disparities in limb characteristics (i.e., volume or strength).
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.004 | 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".