Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 40

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Long‐term use of smokeless tobacco and physical performance in middle‐aged men

BOLINDER, G., NORÉN, A., WAHREN, J., DE FAIRE, U.·1997·European Journal of Clinical Investigation

Abstract

To determine the influence of prolonged nicotine exposure on maximal physical working capacity, a study of clinical measures of physical fitness and cardiovascular response to exercise was performed in 144 healthy men, 35–60 years old, subdivided into smokeless tobacco users, smokers and non‐users of tobacco. Regular users of smokeless tobacco, with exposures of more than 20 years, showed similar maximal oxygen uptake (mean 3.48 L min−1, SD 0.49, n = 48) to non‐users (mean 3.51 L min−1, SD 0.51, n = 65). In smokeless tobacco users, higher blood pressure and heart rate values were observed at rest and at submaximal work, after exposure to tobacco shortly before the exercise test, but not at maximal work. However, significantly lower maximal oxygen uptake was found for smokers (mean 2.88 L min−1, SD 0.49, n = 31) compared with non‐users (P < 0.001). Plasma concentration of cotinine, the main metabolite of nicotine, was significantly higher in smokeless tobacco users (mean 347 ng mL−1, SD 175, n = 48) than in smokers (mean 253 ng mL−1, SD 153, n = 31, P < 0.001). The findings indicate that long‐term use of smokeless tobacco does not significantly influence exercise capacity in healthy, physically well‐trained subjects.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1046/j.1365-2362.1997.1290677.x

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
BOLINDER, G., NORÉN, A., WAHREN, J., & DE FAIRE, U.
Venue
European Journal of Clinical Investigation
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1997-05
Volume
27
Issue
5
Pages
427-433
ISSN
  • 0014-2972
  • 1365-2362
Cited by
40
References
0
Language
en

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.