Exercise‐Induced Reduction in Obesity and Insulin Resistance in Women: a Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To determine the effects of equivalent diet- or exercise-induced weight loss and exercise without weight loss on subcutaneous fat, visceral fat, and insulin sensitivity in obese women. RESEARCH METHODS AND PROCEDURES: Fifty-four premenopausal women with abdominal obesity [waist circumference 110.1 +/- 5.8 cm (mean +/- SD)] (BMI 31.3 +/- 2.0 kg/m2) were randomly assigned to one of four groups: diet weight loss (n = 15), exercise weight loss (n = 17), exercise without weight loss (n = 12), and a weight-stable control group (n = 10). All groups underwent a 14-week intervention. RESULTS: Body weight decreased by approximately 6.5% within both weight loss groups and was unchanged in the exercise without weight loss and control groups. In comparison with controls, cardiorespiratory fitness improved within the exercise groups only (p < 0.01). Reduction in total, abdominal, and abdominal subcutaneous fat within the exercise weight loss group was greater (p < 0.001) than within all other groups. The reduction in total and abdominal fat within the diet weight loss and exercise without weight loss groups was greater than within controls (p < 0.001) but not different from each other (p > 0.05). Visceral fat decreased within all treatment groups (p < 0.008), and these changes were not different from each other. In comparison with the control group, insulin sensitivity improved within the exercise weight loss group alone (p < 0.001). DISCUSSION: Daily exercise without caloric restriction was associated with substantial reductions in total fat, abdominal fat, visceral fat, and insulin resistance in women. Exercise without weight loss was also associated with a substantial reduction in total and abdominal obesity.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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".