Cardiorespiratory Fitness Is Strongly Related to the Metabolic Syndrome in Adolescents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The metabolic syndrome is a predecessor of type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease (1). In adults, physical activity is important for both preventing and treating metabolic syndrome (2). A limited number of studies have examined the impact of physical activity on metabolic syndrome in youth (3–7). The results from the few existing studies are conflicting, reporting no associations, weak effects, and strong effects of physical activity (3–7). These inconsistencies may reflect that most of these studies measured physical activity using self-report questionnaire measures, which have limited validity and reliability in youth (8,9). While one paper reported that the beneficial effects of physical activity on metabolic syndrome are limited to girls (3), published studies of physical activity and metabolic syndrome in youth have been limited to predominantly Caucasian samples and lack ethnic comparisons. Thus, it is unknown whether the effects of physical activity on metabolic syndrome are consistent in different population groups. The purpose of this study is to 1 ) examine the relation between objective measures of cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF) (the ability to perform endurance activities) and metabolic syndrome in adolescents and 2 ) determine whether the relationship is consistent by sex and ethnicity. The study sample consisted of 1,561 adolescents, aged 12–19 years, who participated in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) 1999–2002, which is a nationally representative cross-sectional survey (10 …
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".