ArticleBMC cardiovascular disorders2025
Association between glycation gap and impaired cardiorespiratory fitness: evidence from American adults.
Article in BMC cardiovascular disorders, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Association of Cardiovascular Risk Burden with Cardiorespiratory Fitness and Functional Performance in Patients with Post-Stroke Spasticity: A Retrospective Observational Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Comparative prognostic value of hemoglobin glycation index and glycation gap for mortality risk in adults: A population-based study.Diabetes & vascular disease researchArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCardiorespiratory fitness (CRF) is a critical indicator of overall health, while the glycation gap (G-Gap) emerges as a potential novel biomarker for metabolic and cardiovascular risk assessment. However, the relationship between G-Gap and CRF remains incompletely understood.
objectiveTo investigate the association between glycation gap and impaired CRF, and evaluate its potential as an early health risk indicator.
methodsUsing data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES, 1999-2004), we conducted a comprehensive analysis of 3,818 adult participants. G-Gap was calculated by standardizing glycated albumin (GA) and glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels, comparing actual and predicted HbA1c values. Cardiorespiratory fitness was assessed through maximal oxygen uptake (VO2 max), with impaired CRF defined as performance below the 20th percentile for gender and age-specific thresholds. Multivariate logistic regression models were employed, adjusting for demographic characteristics, laboratory parameters, and potential confounding factors.
resultsIn unadjusted models, For every 1 increase in G-Gap as a continuous variable, the chance of CRF damage increased by 65% (OR 1.65, 95% CI 1.29-2.11). After comprehensive covariate adjustment, the association remained statistically significant, with odds ratios of 1.87 (95% CI 1.41-2.49) in partially adjusted and 1.41 (95% CI 1.01-1.98) in fully adjusted models. Quartile analysis revealed significantly higher risks of impaired CRF in the third and fourth G-Gap quartiles compared to the first quartile.
conclusionsThis study demonstrates an association between higher G-Gap values and an increased likelihood of impaired CRF.
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.