MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2292703900

The effects of a 2 week modified high intensity interval training program on the homeostatic model of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR) in adults with type 2 diabetes.

2014· article· en· W2292703900 on OpenAlexaff
Nadine Shaban, Kenji A. Kenno, Kevin Milne

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular and exercise physiology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHigh-intensity interval trainingInterval trainingInsulin resistanceMedicineHomeostatic model assessmentInternal medicineType 2 diabetesEndocrinologyHomeostasisInsulinAnthropometryAerobic exerciseDiabetes mellitus
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIM: High intensity interval training (HIIT) induces similar metabolic adaptations to traditional steady state aerobic exercise training. Until recently, most HIIT studies have examined maximum efforts in healthy populations. The current study aimed to examine the effects of a 2 week modified HIIT program on the homeostatic model of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR) in individuals with type 2 diabetes (T2D). It was hypothesized that HIIT would improve HOMA-IR. METHODS: Nine individuals with T2D (age=40.2±9.7 y; BMI=33.9±5.3; fasting plasma glucose [FPG]=8.7±2.9 mmol/L; HbA1C=7.3±1.2%; [mean±SD]) performed 6 individualized training sessions of HIIT (4x30 seconds at 100% of estimated maximum workload followed by 4 minutes of active rest) over 2 weeks. HOMA-IR was calculated from FPG and serum insulin and compared against a prior 2 week baseline period. RESULTS: Blood glucose was reduced immediately after each HIIT session (P<0.05). Anthropometrics, FPG, serum insulin, and HOMA-IR were unchanged after training. However, 6 of the 9 individuals exhibited reduced HOMA-IR values after the training period and there was a significant negative correlation between HOMA-IR value prior to training and change in HOMA-IR after HIIT. CONCLUSION: These observations tend to support the positive health benefits of HITT for individuals with T2D reported in recently published data using a modified HIIT protocol. However, they suggest that the magnitude of the disease should be assessed when examining the effects of exercise interventions in individuals with T2D.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.948
Threshold uncertainty score0.271

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.189 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
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

Citations58
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicCardiovascular and exercise physiologyFrench-language works237,207