Short-term high-intensity interval training improves phosphocreatine recovery kinetics following moderate-intensity exercise in humans
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Previous studies have shown that high-intensity training improves biochemical markers of oxidative potential in skeletal muscle within a 2-week period. The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of short-term high-intensity interval training on the time constant () of phosphocreatine (PCr) recovery following moderate-intensity exercise, an in vivo measure of functional oxidative capacity. Seven healthy active subjects (age, 21 +/- 4 years; body mass, 69 +/- 11 kg) performed 6 sessions of 4-6 maximal-effort 30 s cycling intervals within a 2-week period, and 7 subjects (age, 24 +/- 5 years; body mass, 80 +/- 15 kg) served as controls. Prior to and following training, phosphorous-31 magnetic resonance spectroscopy (31P-MRS; GE 3T Excite System) was used to measure relative changes in high-energy phosphates and intracellular pH of the quadriceps muscles during gated dynamic leg-extension exercise (3 cycles of 90 s exercise and 5 min of rest). A monoexponential model was used to estimate the of PCr recovery. The of PCr recovery after leg-extension exercise was reduced by 14% with high-intensity interval training (pretraining, 43 +/- 14 s vs. post-training, 37 +/- 15 s; p < 0.05) with no change in the control group (44 +/- 12 s vs. 43 +/- 12 s, respectively; p > 0.05). These findings demonstrate that short-term high-intensity interval training is an effective means of increasing functional oxidative capacity in skeletal muscle.
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".