Physical Activity, Energy Expenditure and Intake in 11 to 12 Years Old Japanese Prepubertal Obese Boys.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to find out the differences in physical activity (PA), energy expenditure (EE) and energy intake (EI) under free-living conditions between Japanese prepubertal obese and nonobese boys. The subjects were 15 prepubertal obese boys (Age: 11.7+/-0.4 years old, Body fat: 35.2+/-1.6%) who do not have obese parents and siblings and 15 prepubertal nonobese boys (Age: 11.8+/-0.4 years old, Body fat: 18.5+/-0.8%). We assessed their daily PA by heart rate (HR) monitoring, pedometer step counts (PSC) and time for sedentary activities (SA). We also examined calculated EE from HR-VO(2) regression, EI and percentage of macronutrient EI. Results are as follows: Percentage of body fat had significant correlation with weight, BMI, time for SA, percentage EI of protein (positive, p<0.001), VO(2max), VO(2max) per body weight, VO(2max) per LBM, PSC, TEE per body weight, TEI per body weight (negative, p<0.001), percentage of EI of carbohydrate (negative, p<0.01). The values of the obese were significantly lower in total EE per body weight and in total EI per body weight. EI from dinner was significantly higher in the obese group. The values of the obese were significantly higher in percentage EI from protein and that from carbohydrate. The results of this study showed prepubertal obese boys who do not have obese parents and siblings have low PA and spend much time for sedentary activities. Obese boys consume higher percentage energy of protein and lower percentage of carbohydrate though differences in EE and EI were found only in total EE per body weight and total EI per body weight between obese boys and nonobese boys.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".