Acute exercise ameliorates differences in insulin resistance between physically active and sedentary overweight adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although regular exercise is associated with reduced cardiometabolic disease risk among overweight adults, it remains unclear whether much of the health benefits of exercise are derived from the most recent session(s) of exercise or if they are the result of adaptations stemming from weeks, months, or even years of training. The purpose of this study was to compare the effects of habitual and acute exercise on key markers of cardiometabolic disease risk in overweight adults. We compared insulin sensitivity index (ISI) using an oral glucose tolerance test, blood pressure (BP), blood lipids, and systemic inflammatory cytokines in 12 overweight to mildly obese adults (BMI: 27-34 kg/m(2)) who exercise regularly (EX; >2.5 h exercise per week) with a well-matched cohort of 12 nonexercisers (Non-EX). Baseline measurements in EX were performed exactly 3 days after exercise, whereas Non-EX remained sedentary. We repeated these measurements the day after a session of exercise in both groups. At baseline, ISI was significantly greater in EX versus Non-EX (3.1 ± 0.2 vs. 2.3 ± 0.2; p = 0.02), but BP, blood lipids, and plasma concentration of the systemic inflammatory cytokines we measured were not different between groups. Acute exercise increased ISI the next morning in Non-EX (2.3 ± 0.2 vs. 2.8 ± 0.3; p = 0.03) but not EX. As a result, ISI was similar between groups the morning after exercise. In summary, exercising regularly was accompanied by a persistent improvement in insulin sensitivity that lasted at least 3 days after exercise in overweight adults, but just one session of exercise increased insulin sensitivity among sedentary overweight adults to levels equivalent to the regular exercisers.
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".