Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Dear Editor-in-Chief: In a recent study, Rynders et al. (4). came to a potentially significant conclusion that the antidiabetic drug metformin provides no added benefit to 6 months of lifestyle modifications among obese adolescents. The authors reported improvements in body composition, inflammatory factors, and cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF) in a group of obese adolescents, whether or not they used metformin. This conclusion certainly strengthens the importance of and promotes proper nutrition and physical activity in that population. The authors further observed that the improvements in body composition and inflammatory factors were much more pronounced in those participants who had demonstrated an improvement in CRF, as reflected by increased maximal oxygen consumption (V˙O2max). They thus concluded that future intervention programs should be designed to increase V˙O2max. Although we generally agree with such recommendations, the authors’ conclusion is not borne out by their reported data. V˙O2 and V˙O2max are measured in absolute terms of liters of O2 per minute. When training effects are assessed in adults, these absolute values are the yardsticks for changes in CRF. In such individuals, body weight–normalized values may reflect weight loss or gain due to training, diet, or other factors. However, when children or adolescents are assessed, increases in absolute V˙O2max may reflect growth-related gains in muscle mass (2). To take into account both the training and growth factors, one should normalize V˙O2max to fat-free mass rather than to total body mass. When a 4.1 mL O2·kg−1·min−1 improvement in V˙O2max is observed in conjunction with a 4.3-kg weight loss, as was reported in the present study, one should be hard pressed to assign the improvement to fitness gain rather than to weight loss. We suggest that the observed V˙O2max increase reflects weight reduction rather than increased CRF. The authors note that “these favorable changes occurred with an average of only one supervised exercise setting per week” (4, p. 790). Indeed, the 12.5% V˙O2max improvement after a single weekly session contradicts previous findings in youths (1,3). Although the data provided in the article do not allow us to examine the effect of weight reduction on V˙O2max, the data in Table 2 (4) can easily be interpreted to mean that favorable changes in inflammatory factors and CRF were more pronounced in participants with greater reductions in body weight and fat percentage. The authors have the data (absolute V˙O2max, body mass, and fat percentage) and may be interested in verifying our suggestion. Moreover, the reported maximal test values (heart rates <160 beats·min−1, low RERs that diminished posttraining, and V˙O2max <21 mL O2·kg−1·min−1) suggest that the incremental test performed by the participants resulted in peak rather than maximal V˙O2max values. We propose that the observed postintervention augmentation of cardiovascular values could also reflect the participants’ habituation to the testing environment. Thus, the study certainly supports the importance of lifestyle modifications in obese adolescents. It also demonstrates an association between weight reduction and improvement in V˙O2max. However, it neither proves nor disproves the significance of exercise training in improving cardiorespiratory fitness. The training load was simply insufficient. Bareket Falk, PhD Department of Kinesiology Brock University, St. Catharines, ON, Canada Raffy Dotan, MSc Faculty of Applied Health Sciences Brock University, St. Catharines, ON, Canada The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,017 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,007 | 0,010 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,008 | 0,004 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».