Dose‐response effects of exercise on bone mineral density and content in post‐menopausal women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Exercise is one of the most widely used non‐pharmacological strategies to prevent bone resorption during menopause. Given the detrimental consequences of bone demineralization, the purpose of this study was to examine the effects of prescribing different exercise volumes on bone mineral density and content in previously inactive, post‐menopausal women during a 12‐month intervention and 1 year after intervention completion. Four hundred post‐menopausal women were randomized to either 150 min/wk (MODERATE dose group) or 300 min/wk (HIGH dose group) of aerobic exercise. Total bone mineral density (g/cm 2 ) and bone mineral content (g) were assessed at baseline, 12 months (end of the intervention) and 24 months (follow‐up) using whole body dual‐energy X‐ray absorptiometry. At 12 months, mean bone mineral density among women in the HIGH dose group was estimated to be 0.006 g/cm 2 (95% CI: 0.001‐0.010; P = 0.02) higher than that of women randomized to the MODERATE dose group. At 24 months, the mean difference between groups remained statistically significant, indicating higher mean bone mineral density among women in the HIGH dose group (0.007 g/cm 2 ; 0.001‐0.001; P = 0.04). No significant differences between groups were found at any time point for bone mineral content. In an exploratory analysis, women who completed more min/wk of impact exercises had significantly higher mean levels of bone mineral density at 12 months compared to baseline (0.006 g/cm 2 , 95% CI: 0.006‐0.012; P = 0.03). These findings suggest that higher volumes of exercise, especially impact exercise, lead to a smaller decline in total bone mineral density, which may remain following intervention completion.
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 | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".