Physical activity level and body composition among adults with Type 1 diabetes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: Physical activity is part of a healthy lifestyle and contributes to prevent weight gain and cardiometabolic disorders. Adults with Type 1 diabetes are at risk of weight gain attributable to various factors, including a high prevalence of sedentary lifestyle related to fear of exercise-induced hypoglycaemia. This project aims to observe the association between physical activity level and body composition in adults with Type 1 diabetes. METHODS: Cross-sectional study; 75 adults with and 75 adults without diabetes (52% men; 41.8 ± 11.8 years old) wore a motion sensor for 1 week and performed a cardiorespiratory fitness test on an ergocycle (VO(2peak)). Body composition was assessed by dual energy X-ray absorptiometry and circumferences measures. RESULTS: Mean body composition was not different between the two groups. VO(2peak) was lower among the group with diabetes than the control subjects (29.3 ± 9.2 vs. 33.5 ± 9.0 ml kg(-1) min(-1); P = 0.005), but their physical activity level (ratio total/resting energy expenditure) was similar (1.68 ± 0.37 vs. 1.65 ± 0.26; P = 0.572). In both groups, having an active lifestyle (physical activity level ≥ 1.7) compared with a more sedentary lifestyle (physical activity level < 1.7) was associated with lower BMI and percentage of total and truncal fat mass (P ≤ 0.030 to P ≤ 0.001). Among adults with diabetes, physical activity level was not associated with diabetes treatment (insulin doses) and control (HbA(1c) and hypoglycaemia) or cardiovascular risk factors (blood pressure and lipid profile). CONCLUSION: As in the population without diabetes, an active lifestyle is associated with a better body composition profile in adults with Type 1 diabetes.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".