Which Body Fat Anthropometric Indicators are Most Strongly Associated with Maximum Oxygen Uptake in Adolescents?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The relationship between maximum consumption of oxygen and indicators of body composition is important due in increasing the chance of developing cardiovascular risk factors. Therefore, the aim of this study was to investigate the association between body fat anthropometric indicators (BMI, WC, WHtR, CI, triceps skinfold, subscapular skinfold, suprailiac skinfold) with VO2max and estimate the predictive ability of anthropometric indicators for the VO2max variation in adolescents. Methods: The study included 879 adolescents (14 - 19 years) and was carried out in southern Brazil. Aerobic fitness was assessed by the modified Canadian Aerobic Fitness test (mCAFT). Independent variables were: body mass index, waist circumference, waist /height ratio, conicity index (CI), triceps skinfold, subscapular skinfold, suprailiac skinfold, sum of triceps and subscapular skinfolds and sum of triceps, subscapularis and suprailiac skinfolds. Analyses were controlled for sociodemographic variables, physical activity and sexual maturation. Results: With the exception of CI for girls, all anthropometric indicators were associated with VO2max of adolescents in both sexes (P < 0.01). The sum of the three skinfolds obtained the highest explanatory power (21% and 23% for males and females, respectively). Conclusions: Only CI for girls did not explain the VO2max variation in adolescents, and the sum of the three skinfolds was the indicator that best predicted the VO2max variation in adolescents.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".