MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2173250284 · doi:10.1152/jappl.2001.90.5.1770

Age, sex, race, initial fitness, and response to training: the HERITAGE Family Study

2001· article· en· W2173250284 on OpenAlexaff
James S. Skinner, Artur Jaskólski, Anna Jaskólska, Joanne B. Krasnoff, Jacques Gagnon, Arthur S. Leon, D. C. Rao, Jack H. Wilmore, Claude Bouchard

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Physiology · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetics and Physical Performance
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersNational Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute
KeywordsDemographyPhysical fitnessRace (biology)Cycle ergometerMedicineGerontologyPsychologyPhysical therapyInternal medicineBiologyHeart rateBlood pressure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Effects of age, sex, race, and initial fitness on training responses of maximal O(2) uptake (VO(2 max)) are unclear. Data were available on 435 whites and 198 blacks (287 men and 346 women), aged 17-65 yr, before and after standardized cycle ergometer training. Individual responses varied widely, but VO(2 max) increased significantly for all groups. Responses by men and women and by blacks and whites of all ages varied widely. There was no sex difference for change (Delta) in VO(2 max) (ml. kg(-1). min(-1)); women had lower initial values and greater relative (%) increases. Blacks began with lower values but had similar responses. Older subjects had a lower Delta but a similar percent change. Baseline VO(2 max) correlated nonsignificantly with DeltaVO(2 max) but significantly with percent change. There were high, medium, and low responders in all age groups, both sexes, both races, and all levels of initial fitness. Age, sex, race, and initial fitness have little influence on VO(2 max) response to standardized training in a large heterogeneous sample of sedentary black and white men and women.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.261 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations262
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied PhysiologySame topicGenetics and Physical PerformanceFrench-language works237,207