Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31546982›Full record

ArticleAntioxidants (Basel, Switzerland)2019

Salivary Antioxidants Status Following Progressive Aerobic Exercise: What Are the Differences between Waterpipe Smokers and Non-Smokers?

Hamid Arazi, Behzad Taati, Forough Rafati Sajedi, Katsuhiko Suzuki

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Antioxidants (Basel, Switzerland), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Hamid AraziDepartment of Exercise Physiology, Faculty of Sports Sciences, University of Guilan, Rasht 4199843653, Iran. hamidarazi@yahoo.com.ORCID 0000-0002-1594-6515
Behzad TaatiDepartment of Exercise Physiology, Faculty of Sports Sciences, University of Guilan, Rasht 4199843653, Iran. taati.behzad@yahoo.com.
Forough Rafati SajediDepartment of Sport Sciences, Faculty of Humanities Sciences, Islamic Azad University, Rasht Branch, Rasht 4147654919, Iran. frafatisajedi@yahoo.com.
Katsuhiko SuzukiFaculty of Sport Sciences, Waseda University, Tokorozawa 359-1192, Japan. katsu.suzu@waseda.jp.ORCID 0000-0002-6572-5809

Funding

The Strategic Research Foundation at Private Universities 2015-2019 from the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology of Japan. S1511017
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Waterpipe tobacco (WPT) smoking is a public health problem with similar or even stronger effects than cigarette smoking. Although it appears to be associated with extensive oxidative stress, there is a limited number of studies on the oxidative effects of WPT smoking in stressful conditions. We, therefore, compared the responses of salivary flow rate (SFR), uric acid (UA) concentration, and peroxidase (POX) and 2,2-diphenyl-1-picryl-hydrazyl-hydrate (DPPH) activities between WPT smokers and non-smokers following a bout of exhaustive aerobic exercise (AE). Twenty-three sedentary young women (age: 22.95 ± 2.83 years) participated in this study, including 11 smokers (7.00 ± 1.41 uses/week) and 12 non-smokers. All participants were required to perform the Bruce protocol treadmill test at an initial gradient of 10% at 1.7 mph, with increases of these parameters every 3 min until exhaustion. Unstimulated saliva samples were collected before, immediately after, and 1 hour after AE. WPT smokers showed lower SFR compared with non-smokers at all time points (

Indexed as

DPPHfree radicalshookahperoxidasesalivauric acid

Identifiers

PMID31546982
PMCPMC6826468

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 OpenQuestion graph.