Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39743375›Full record

ArticlePhysiological reports2025

Investigations of segmental arterial stiffness in a cross-sectional study on young adult male trained swimmers, cyclists, and non-trained men.

Masato Nishiwaki, Daisuke Kume, Naoyuki Matsumoto

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Physiological reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. 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

3 authors.

Masato NishiwakiFaculty of Engineering, Osaka Institute of Technology, Osaka, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2643-9532
Daisuke KumeFaculty of Information Science and Technology, Osaka Institute of Technology, Hirakata, Osaka, Japan.
Naoyuki MatsumotoFaculty of Environmental Symbiotic Sciences, Prefectural University of Kumamoto, Kumamoto, Japan.

Funding

JSPS KAKENHI 23K10649JSPS KAKENHI 24K02837
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Contrary to cardiovascular risk reductions by aerobic exercise, arterial stiffness, as assessed by brachial-ankle pulse wave velocity (PWV), is higher in swimmers and controls than in other aerobically trained individuals. The main muscles actively recruited in swimming are in the upper limbs, so this study aimed to investigate heart-brachial PWV in swimmers and to compare arterial stiffness indices between modes and measurement localities. Subjects comprised 60 individuals (18-22 years), including 20 untrained controls (Con), 20 aerobically trained cyclists (Aero), and 20 swimmers (Swim). Characteristics and strength did not differ, but peak oxygen uptake was significantly higher in Aero and Swim than in Con. Brachial-ankle PWV was significantly lower in Aero than in Con and Swim and no significant difference was observed between Con and Swim (Con, 1070 ± 115; Aero, 916 ± 109; Swim, 1035 ± 91 cm/s). Nevertheless, heart-brachial PWV was significantly lower in Swim than in Con and tended to be lower in Swim than in Aero (Con, 344 ± 25; Aero, 330 ± 41; Swim, 308 ± 31 cm/s). Heart-ankle PWV was significantly lower in both Swim and Aero than in Con (Con, 618 ± 47; Aero, 580 ± 54; Swim, 576 ± 43 cm/s). Therefore, these findings indicate that swimmers can develop segment-specific reductions in heart-brachial arterial stiffness, unlike aerobically trained cyclists.

Indexed as

BicyclingPulse Wave AnalysisSwimmingVascular StiffnessAdolescentAdultAnkle Brachial IndexAthletesBrachial ArteryCross-Sectional StudiesHumansMaleOxygen ConsumptionYoung Adultaerobic exercisearteriosclerosisvascular function

Identifiers

PMID39743375
PMCPMC11693416

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.