Effects of High-Intensity Training on Anaerobic and Aerobic Contributions to Total Energy Release During Repeated Supramaximal Exercise in Obese Adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Studying relative anaerobic and aerobic metabolism contributions to total energy release during exercise may be valuable in understanding exercise energetic demands and the energetic adaptations that occur in response to acute or chronic exercise in obese adults. The aim of the present study is to evaluate the effects of 6 weeks of high-intensity training (HIT) on relative anaerobic and aerobic contributions to total energy release and on peak power output during repeated supramaximal cycling exercises (SCE) in obese adults. Twenty-four obese adults (body mass index = ± 33 kg.m −2 ) were randomized into a control group ( n = 12) and an HIT group ( n = 12). Accumulated oxygen deficits (ml.min −1 ) and anaerobic and aerobic contributions (%) were measured in all groups before and after training via repeated SCE. In addition, the peak power output performed during SCE was determined using the force-velocity test. Before HIT, anaerobic contributions to repeated SCE did not differ between the groups and decreased significantly during the third and fourth repetitions. After HIT, anaerobic contributions increased significantly in the HIT group (+11 %, p < 0.01) and were significantly higher than those of the control group ( p < 0.01). Moreover, the peak power obtained during SCE increased significantly in the HIT group (+110 W.kg −1 , p < 0.01) and correlated positively with increases in anaerobic contributions ( r = 0.9, p < 0.01). In obese adults, HIT increased anaerobic contributions to energy release which were associated with peak power enhancement in response to repeated SCE. Consequently, HIT may be an appropriate approach for improving energy contributions and muscle power among obese adults.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".