The effects of exercise training on insulin resistance in patients with coronary artery disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: It is unclear whether the beneficial effects of habitual exercise on insulin resistance are due to concomitant weight loss, changes in diet or whether they are simply related to the transient effects of the last bout of exercise. Moreover, patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) have not been studied. DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial. METHODS: To determine the effects of exercise training on insulin resistance (i.e. low insulin sensitivity) in CAD patients without diabetes independent of changes in weight, diet or the effect of acute exercise, 29 patients were randomized to 12 weeks of supervised exercise training and 26 to usual activity. Insulin sensitivity was determined at 72 h following their last bout of exercise using the minimal model technique. Weight was held constant by adjusting caloric intake. RESULTS: Following the intervention, peak oxygen uptake increased by 0.18+/-0.14 l/min in the exercise training group, which was significantly higher (P<0.0001) than that in the usual activity group (0.02+/-0.14 l/min). Insulin sensitivity did not change significantly within or between groups during the study [exercise training -0.24+/-1.15 x 10(4)/min and usual activity 0.06+/-0.67 x 10(4)/min/(microU/ml)]. CONCLUSIONS: Twelve weeks of moderate exercise training in the absence of weight loss did not result in significant change in insulin resistance in patients with CAD.
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 | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".