Aerobic exercise in depressed youth: A feasibility and clinical outcomes pilot
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aim Major depressive disorder (MDD) onset generally occurs in adolescence/early adulthood. However, pharmacotherapy use in younger populations is restricted due to black box warnings. Aerobic exercise may be a viable treatment option for mild‐to‐moderate MDD, but little is known about its acceptability/effectiveness in young adults. Methods Unmedicated and relatively inactive 18‐to‐24 olds with MDD completed fitness/clinical assessments at baseline and after 12 weeks of supervised aerobic exercise (3×/wk; 30‐minute sessions in target heart rate [HR] zone), with the aim of increasing cardiovascular fitness (VO 2max ‐indexed). Results Post‐intervention, predicted VO 2max increased, whereas depression scores decreased. A correlation existed between time spent in target HR zone and anxiety symptom decreases. Exercise adherence and satisfaction were high, and drop‐out was minimal. Conclusions This pilot is among the first to assess the feasibility of aerobic exercise as an antidepressant treatment strategy in young adults, a group for which options have limited acceptability.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".