Effects of the addition of a resistance training programme to a caloric restriction weight loss intervention on psychosocial factors in overweight and obese post-menopausal women: A Montreal Ottawa New Emerging Team study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study was to examine the effects of the addition of a resistance training programme to a caloric restriction weight loss intervention on psychosocial profile. The study sample consisted of 137 overweight and obese post-menopausal women. Participants were randomized to a caloric restriction group and caloric restriction + resistance training group. Psychosocial, anthropometric, and metabolic variables were measured before and after the 6-month weight loss intervention. Both groups presented similar weight loss and there were no significant differences between the caloric restriction group and caloric restriction + resistance training group for changes in psychosocial profile. Thereafter, all participants were classified into quintiles based on the amount of weight loss. In all quintiles, women markedly improved body esteem and self-esteem, and decreased hunger and perceived risk for diabetes mellitus (P < 0.05). However, significant increases in dietary restraint were observed in quintiles 2-5 (> or =2.4 % body weight loss), decreases in disinhibition in quintiles 3-5 (> or =4.9 %), increases in self-efficacy in quintiles 3-5 (> or =4.9 %), and increases in health perceptions in quintile 5 (> or =11.1%). The results of this study do not support the hypothesis that the addition of a resistance training programme to a caloric restriction weight loss intervention has additional benefits on psychosocial profile. Overall, the significant improvements in the psychosocial profile observed were mostly accounted for by the degree of weight loss.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".