ArticleEuropean journal of applied physiology2024
Association of central blood pressure with an exaggerated blood pressure response to exercise among elite athletes.
Article in European journal of applied physiology, 2024. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Association of aortic root diameter and vascular function with an exaggerated blood pressure response to exercise among elite athletes.Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society · 2026Article
- Prognostic value of exercise blood pressure: role of fitness and exercise training.American journal of physiology. Heart and circulatory physiology · 2026Review
- Stronger hearts, weaker leaps? The cardiac power paradox in elite soccer.European journal of applied physiology · 2026Article
- Associations Between Exercise Blood Pressure Responses and Oxygen Pulse During Cardiopulmonary Exercise Testing: A Cross-Sectional Study.International journal of general medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe systolic blood pressure/workload (SBP/MET) slope was recently reported to be a reliable parameter to identify an exaggerated blood pressure response (eBPR) in the normal population and in athletes. However, it is unclear whether an eBPR correlates with central blood pressure (CBP) and vascular function in elite athletes.
methodsWe examined 618 healthy male elite athletes (age 25.8 ± 5.1 years) of mixed sports with a standardized maximum exercise test. CBP and vascular function were measured non-invasively with a validated oscillometric device. The SBP/MET slope was calculated and the threshold for an eBPR was set at > 6.2 mmHg/MET. Two groups were defined according to ≤ 6.2 and > 6.2 mmHg/MET, and associations of CBP and vascular function with the SBP/MET slope were compared for each group.
resultsAthletes with an eBPR (n = 180, 29%) displayed a significantly higher systolic CBP (102.9 ± 7.5 vs. 100 ± 7.7 mmHg, p = 0.001) but a lower absolute (295 ± 58 vs. 384 ± 68 W, p < 0.001) and relative workload (3.14 ± 0.54 vs. 4.27 ± 1.1 W/kg, p < 0.001) compared with athletes with a normal SBP/MET slope (n = 438, 71%). Systolic CBP was positively associated with the SBP/MET slope (r = 0.243, p < 0.001). In multiple logistic regression analyses, systolic CBP (odds ratio [OR] 1.099, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.045-1.155, p < 0.001) and left atrial volume index (LAVI) (OR 1.282, CI 1.095-1.501, p = 0.002) were independent predictors of an eBPR.
conclusionSystolic CBP and LAVI were independent predictors of an eBPR. An eBPR was further associated with a lower performance level, highlighting the influence of vascular function on the BPR and performance of male elite athletes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.