Sub-Maximal Exercise Altered the Prednisolone Absorption Pattern.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Prednisolone has been widely used due to its relatively short pituitary inhibition and its moderate potency. Exercise is one of the non-pharmacological interventions for glucocorticoid- induced osteoporosis prevention. However, the effects of exercise on the pharmacokinetics of prednisolone were unclear. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effects of sub-maximal exercise on the pharmacokinetics of prednisolone. METHODS: A randomized, double-blind, cross-over experimental design was used. Subjects needed to undertake two trials: a non-exercise trial (NE) and an exercise trial (E). After the first blood sampling, the subjects consumed 5 mg of prednisolone with 100 mL of water and then took a rest for 30 min. In the E trial, subjects cycled at 70% VO(2max) intensity until exhaustion. When subjects underwent the NE trial, they remained seated for the duration of the experiment. Serial blood samples were collected at 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, 1, 1.25, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10 and 12 hr after prednisolone administration. Prednisolone and cortisol concentration were analyzed with a validated high performance liquid chromatographic method. RESULTS: This study indicated that the maximum concentration of the E trial was significantly lower than the NE trial (p<.05). However, the area under the plasma concentration-time, half life, the time-averaged total body clearance, and the apparent volume of the distribution showed no significant difference between two trials. The mean percentage change of cortisol of E trail was significantly higher than NE trail (p<.05). CONCLUSIONS: The results suggested that sub-maximal exercise altered the prednisolone absorption pattern.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".