Selecting exercise regimens and strains to modify obesity and diabetes in rodents: an overview
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Exercise is part of a healthy lifestyle and frequently is an important component in combating chronic diseases, such as obesity and diabetes. Understanding the molecular events initiated by regular exercise is best studied in laboratory animals, with mice and rats being favoured for a number of reasons. However, the wide variety of rodent strains available for biomedical research often makes it challenging to select an animal strain suitable for studying specific disease outcomes. In the present review we focus on exercise as a management strategy for obesity and diabetes and we discuss: (i) exercise paradigms in humans shown to ameliorate signs and symptoms of obesity and diabetes; (ii) different rodent strains in terms of their advantages, disadvantages and limitations when using specific forms of exercise; (iii) the strengths and weaknesses of commonly used laboratory methods for rodent exercise; and (iv) the unintended consequences of exercise that are often manifested by increased hormonal and oxidative stress responses.
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.
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it