Aerobic Capacity of Elderly People after a Short 6-week Intermittent Exercise Programme
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: One of the most debilitating effects of advancing age is the progressive decline in aerobic exercise capacity. To prevent this decrease, exercise prescription has been proved to be effective in compensating for the age-associated decline in maximal oxygen capacity. Methods: 27 healthy sedentary elderly men (10) and women (17) aged 67±7 yr, were involved in a tailored 6-week intermittent exercise programme, with 30 min cycling per session, 3 times a week. One session alternated 4 min at a workload corresponding to the ventilatory threshold (called “bases”) and 1 min to a charge corresponding to 90% of the maximum tolerated power of the subjects (called “peaks”). This was repeated 6 times during one session. To determine these charges, all subjects underwent a 1-minute-step maximal incremental exercise test to find out their maximal tolerated power, peak oxygen consumption (VO2peak), maximal heart rate, and maximal lactate. A second maximal incremental exercise test was performed after the programme, to compare the different parameters. Results: For the whole group, maximal tolerated power increased from 113±8 watts to 13±9 watts (P < 0.001), VO2 peak increased from 19.8±0.9 ml·kg-1·min-1 to 22.2 ±0.9 ml·kg-1·min-1 (P=0.002), maximal heart rate (143±4 vs 144±4 beats·min-1) and maximal lactate (5.4±0.3 vs 5.7±0.3 mmol·L-1) did not change. VO2 at ventilatory threshold increased from 950±57 ml·min-1 to 1095±69 ml·min-1 (P=0.007), and the corresponding power increased from 65±5 watts to 82±6 watts (P < 0.001). Conclusions: Even after a short time training programme (6 weeks), we observed a significant improvement in aerobic capacity, and especially in sub-maximal workloads, which represented, for these subjects, their daily-life capacity.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".