Perceived exertion with glucose ingestion in adolescent males with IDDM
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The rating of perceived exertion (RPE) is an indicator of exercise effort in adolescents that may be influenced by certain pediatric conditions. The purpose of this study was to determine the influence of insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (IDDM) and glucose intake on RPE. METHODS: Eight male adolescents with IDDM and eight healthy controls of similar age, weight, and VO2peak cycled for 60 min at 60%VO2peak on two occasions spaced 1-4 wk apart. During a control trial (CT), subjects drank water, and in a glucose trial (GT), glucose at a rate of approximately 1.5 g x kg(-1) x h(-1). Heart rate, ventilation, and RPE (Borg 6-20 scale) were assessed at 5, 25, 35, and 55 min and blood glucose and lactate levels before and at 30 and 60 min. RESULTS: RPE in both trials was 15-25% higher in IDDM versus healthy subjects (F = 8.83; df = 1,14; eta-squared = 0.39; P = 0.01). In CT, it increased from 10.6 +/- 0.4 at 5 min to 15.2 +/- 0.6 at 55 min in IDDM and from 9.3 +/- 0.9 at 5 min to 13.0 +/- 0.8 at 55 min in healthy adolescents. In GT, RPE increased similarly to CT in the IDDM group but was 1-2 points lower in the healthy group. Blood glucose levels were 4.8 +/- 1.8 mmol x L(-1) and 1.8 +/- 0.4 mmol x L(-1) higher by the end of exercise in GT than in CT for the IDDM and healthy groups, respectively. There were no differences in heart rate, ventilation, or lactate levels between the groups or trials. CONCLUSIONS: For exercise performed at a similar moderate intensity, RPE in IDDM is higher by 2-3 points than in controls. Compared with water, glucose intake is associated with lower RPE in healthy, but not in IDDM, adolescents.
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) | 0.000 | 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".