ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2022
A New Approach for Evaluation of Cardiovascular Fitness and Cardiac Responses to Maximal Exercise Test in Master Runners: A Cross-Sectional Study.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Association of Sports Practice in Childhood and Adolescence with Cardiac Autonomic Modulation in Adulthood: A Retrospective Epidemiological Study.Sports medicine - open · 2024Article
- Study of Morpho-Functional Characteristics of the Cardiovascular System According to Electrocardiography, Phonocardiography, Echocardiography in Masters Athletics.Clinical interventions in aging · 2023Article
- Exercise preconditioning improves electrocardiographic signs of myocardial ischemic/hypoxic injury and malignant arrhythmias occurring after exhaustive exercise in rats.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Cardiac Evaluation of Exercise Testing in a Contemporary Population of Preschool Children: A New Approach Providing Reference Values.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of this study was to analyze the cardiac autonomic function at rest, at maximum exercise, and in recovery after exercise and to determine sex-specific and age-specific values for resting heart rate (RHR), hear rate (HR)-peak, HR recovery (HRR), and HR variability at rest in master runners. Fifty endurance runners (21 women) participated in this study (43.28 ± 5.25 years). The subjects came from different athletic clubs in Andalusia (Spain), and the testing protocol was performed in-season. A 3-km running test was performed and the cardiovascular response was monitored. Regarding sex, no significant differences were found regarding cardiovascular autonomic function at rest, during exercise, and following maximal exercise, only at rest, the standard deviation of all R-R intervals and low frequency values displayed significantly (p < 0.05) lower scores in women. 46% of athletes showed an RHR < 60 bpm. Additionally, HR-peak showed a significant correlation with age (r = −0.369; p = 0.009) and HRR5min (r = 0.476, p = 0.001). Also, endurance performance was inversely associated with obesity traits and cardiometabolic risk factors. In summary, age, sex, fitness, or anthropometrics characteristics did not show a relevant influence on cardiovascular autonomic modulation in master runners. However, the 3-km performance displayed a significant negative association with several factors of cardiometabolic risk.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.