Effectiveness of Physical Exercise to Reduce Cardiovascular Risk Factors in Youths: A Randomized Clinical Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The aim of the current study was to test the effectiveness of a physical activity and exercise-based program in a clinical context to reduce cardiovascular risk factors in children and adolescents. METHODS: A randomized clinical trial was conducted in a pediatric preventive outpatient clinic. Intervention was 14 weeks of exercise for the intervention group or general health advice for the control group. The primary and the secondary outcomes were reduction of cardiovascular risk factors and the feasibility and the effectiveness of clinical advice plan to practice physical exercises at home. RESULTS: A total of 134 children were screened; 26 met eligibility criteria. Of these, 10 were allocated in the exercise intervention group and nine were included in the control group until the end of the intervention. Those patients who discontinued the intervention had the lowest scores of z-BMI (P = 0.033) and subscapular skin fold (P = 0.048). After 14 weeks of intervention, no statistical differences were found between the groups. High-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) was higher in the exercise group, with a mild tendency to be significant (P = 0.066). Patients who adhere to treatment had diastolic blood pressure decreased from baseline to the end of the follow-up period in the control group (P = 0.013). Regardless of this result, the other comparisons within the group were not statistically different between T0 and T14. CONCLUSION: A low-cost physical activity advice intervention presented many barriers for implementation in routine clinical care, limiting its feasibility and evaluation of effectiveness to reduce cardiovascular risk factors.
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 | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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".