The independent and combined effects of exercise training and reducing sedentary behavior on cardiometabolic risk factors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This pilot study examined if the combination of exercise training and reducing sedentary time (ST) results in greater changes to health markers than either intervention alone. Fifty-seven overweight/obese participants (19 males/39 females) (mean ± SD; age, 43.6 ± 9.9 years; body mass index (BMI), 35.1 ± 4.6 kg·m(-2)) completed the 12-week study and were randomly assigned to (i) EX: exercise 5 days·week(-1) for 40 min·session(-1) at moderate intensity; (ii) rST: reduce ST and increase nonexercise physical activity; (iii) EX-rST: combination of EX and rST; and (iv) CON: maintain behavior. Fasting lipids, blood pressure (BP), peak oxygen uptake, BMI, and 2-h oral glucose tolerance tests were completed pre- and post-intervention. EX and EX-rST increased peak oxygen uptake by ∼10% and decreased systolic BP (both p < 0.001). BMI decreased by -3.3% (95% confidence interval: -4.6% to -1.9%) for EX-rST and -2.2% (-3.5% to 0.0%) for EX. EX-rST significantly increased composite insulin-sensitivity index by 17.8% (2.8% to 32.8%) and decreased insulin area under the curve by 19.4% (-31.4% to -7.3%). No other groups improved in insulin action variables. rST group decreased ST by 7% (∼50 min·day(-1)); however, BP was the only health-related outcome that improved. EX and EX-rST improved peak oxygen uptake and BMI, providing further evidence that moderate-intensity exercise is beneficial. The within-group analysis provides preliminary evidence that exercising and reducing ST may result in improvements in metabolic biomarkers that are not seen with exercise alone, though between-group differences did not reach statistical significance. Future studies, with larger samples, should examine health-related outcomes resulting from greater reductions in ST over longer intervention periods.
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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".