The effects of exercise modality and intensity on energy expenditure and cardiorespiratory response in adults with obesity and treated obstructive sleep apnoea
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To inform recommendations for the exercise component of a healthy lifestyle intervention for adults with obesity and treated obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA), we investigated the total energy expenditure (EE) and cardiorespiratory response to weight-supported (cycling) and unsupported (walking) exercise. Individuals with treated OSA and a body mass index (BMI) > 30 kg/m 2 performed an incremental cardiopulmonary exercise test on a cycle ergometer and a treadmill to determine the peak oxygen uptake [Formula: see text]. Participants subsequently completed two endurance tests on each modality, matched at 80% and 60% of the highest [Formula: see text] determined by the incremental tests, to intolerance. The cardiorespiratory response was measured and total EE was estimated from the [Formula: see text]. Sixteen participants completed all six tests: mean [SD] age 57 [13] years and median [IQ range] BMI 33.3 [30.8–35.3] kg/m 2 . Total EE during treadmill walking was greater than cycling at both high (158 [101] vs. 29 [15] kcal; p < 0.001) and moderate (178 [100] vs. 85 [59] kcal; p = 0.002) intensities, respectively, with similar cardiorespiratory responses and pattern of EE during rest, exercise and recovery. Contrary to current guidelines, walking might be the preferred training modality to achieve the combination of weight loss and increased cardiorespiratory fitness in adults with obesity and treated OSA.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".