MAXIMAL PHYSIOLOGICAL RESPONSES TO TREADMILL AND DEEP WATER RUNNING IN YOUNG AND OLDER ADULTS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to assess the difference in maximal physiological responses between deep water running (DWR) and treadmill running (TMR) in young and older adults. Eighteen women, 9 young (Mean age = 23.6 ± 4.7 yrs) and 9 older (63.3 ± 2.9 yrs), volunteered to participate in the study. Maximal DWR tests were performed using a tethered apparatus allowing for increases in workload resistances. Workload increments were set at 500g increasing 200g/min for the young group, and 200–300g increasing 100–200g/min for the older group. Maximal TMR tests were set at 5.5mph and 3.5mph for the young and old groups respectively with grade increases of 2%/min until volitional fatigue. Descriptive measures for both groups included maximal oxygen consumption (VO2max), heart rate (HRmax), ventilation (VE), respiratory exchange ratio (RER), and blood lactate (Blac). A 2x2 repeated measures ANOVA revealed that young adults exhibit higher VO2max, HRmax, VE, and Blac than older adults for both exercise conditions (p < 0.05). Lower VO2max and HRmax values were observed with DWR for both age groups (p < 0.05). No significant differences were found for VE, RER, and Blac in either group between DWR and TMR tests. Similarly, no significant interaction between exercise condition (DWR vs. TMR) and age (young vs. old) was evident for any of the variables measured. These data suggest that although older adults exhibit lower maximal metabolic responses, differences between DWR and TMR responses occur irrespective of age.
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".