Low body fat and high cardiorespiratory fitness at the onset of the freshmen year may not protect against weight gain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of pre-university adiposity and physical fitness on changes of body weight and adiposity during the freshmen year. Twenty-nine freshmen (sixteen females and thirteen males) completed the study. Body weight and composition (dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry), waist circumference (WC), energy intake (7 d food diary) and activity-related energy expenditure (accelerometry) were measured in September, December and at the end of March. Peak oxygen uptake (VO2peak) was assessed at baseline only. Significant increases in body weight (1.9 (SD 2.0) kg, P < 0.05), BMI (0.6 (SD 0.7) kg/m2, P < 0.05), WC (2.7 (SD 3.0) cm, P < 0.05) and % body fat (BF) (3.1 (SD 2.3) %, P < 0.01) were noted in males, especially over the course of the first semester. No significant changes were observed in females. Results from correlation analyses showed that, baseline %BF was negatively associated with changes in body weight (r - 0.53, P < 0.01) and %BF (r - 0.41, P < 0.05) over the academic year. Baseline %BF predicted 27 % (P < 0.05) of the change in weight. Alcohol intake explained 34 % (P < 0.01) and 17 % (P < 0.05) of the changes in WC and %BF, respectively. The change in body weight and %BF were also positively associated with baseline VO2peak (r 0.51, P < 0.01; r 0.48, P < 0.01, respectively) while dietary restraint was negatively related to the changes in %BF (r - 0.43, P < 0.05). In summary, lower pre-university adiposity, higher VO2peak and higher alcohol intake are associated with greater changes in adiposity and body weight during the freshmen year.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".