Effect of short‐ and long‐duration exercise at the ventilation threshold on subjective appetite and short‐term food intake in children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The effect of exercise on subjective appetite and short‐term food intake has received little study in children. The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of exercise at the ventilation threshold (VeT) on subjective appetite and short‐term food intake in normal weight children (9‐14 years). On 4 separate mornings and in random order, boys and girls (n = 24) completed 4 study sessions of rest or exercise for 15 (short‐duration; SD) or 45 min (long‐duration; LD) 2 h after a standardized breakfast of milk, cereal, and orange juice. Food intake (FI) from a pizza meal was measured 30 min after rest or exercise. Subjective appetite was measured at regular intervals during the study sessions. VeT was determined on a separate day. FI (mean kcal ± SEM) after SD (1087 ± 80) and LD (1131 ± 85) exercise was similar to rest (SD: 1127 ± 99; LD: 1112 ± 94) (p = 0.6). The energy cost of exercise for SD and LD exercise was 75± 4 kcal and 227 ± 13 kcal, respectively. Both exercise sessions resulted in a net energy deficit (SD: ? = ‐115 ± 42, p < 0.01; LD: ? = ‐208 ± 31, p < 0.0001) compared with rest. Furthermore, subjective average appetite increased over time (p<0.0001), but was similar between rest and exercise. In conclusion, short‐term FI is not increased by SD or LD exercise at the VeT and may be an effective strategy to promote healthier body weights in children. Supported by CIHR.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".