The effects of separate and combined dietary weight loss and exercise on fasting ghrelin concentrations in overweight and obese women: a randomized controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Compensatory metabolic changes that accompany weight loss, for example, increased ghrelin, contribute to weight regain and difficulty in long-term weight loss maintenance; however, the separate effects of long-term caloric restriction and exercise on total circulating ghrelin in humans are unknown. DESIGN: A 12-month randomized controlled trial comparing: i) dietary weight loss with a 10% weight loss goal ('diet'; n = 118); ii) moderate-to-vigorous intensity aerobic exercise for 45 min/day, 5 days/week ('exercise'; n = 117); iii) dietary weight loss and exercise ('diet + exercise'; n = 117); or iv) no-lifestyle-change control (n = 87). PARTICIPANTS: 439 overweight or obese postmenopausal women (50-75 y). MEASUREMENTS: Fasting total serum ghrelin was measured by radioimmunoassay at baseline and 12 months. Fasting serum leptin, adiponectin and insulin were also measured. RESULTS: Fasting total ghrelin significantly increased in the diet + exercise arm (+7·4%, P = 0·008) but not in either the diet (+6·5%, P = 0·07) or exercise (+1·0%, P = 0·53) arms compared with control. Greater weight loss was associated with increased ghrelin concentrations, regardless of intervention. Neither baseline ghrelin nor body composition modified the intervention effects on changes in total ghrelin. The 12-month change in total ghrelin was inversely associated with changes in leptin, insulin and insulin resistance, and positively associated with change in adiponectin. CONCLUSIONS: Greater weight loss, achieved through a reduced calorie diet or exercise, is associated with increased total ghrelin concentrations in overweight or obese postmenopausal women.
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) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".