What Is the Role of Resistance Exercise in Improving the Cardiometabolic Health of Adolescents with Obesity?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Traditionally, individuals with obesity have been encouraged to participate in aerobic exercise for long-term weight management and improved obesity-related health outcomes. Recently, resistance exercise has become a popular mode of exercise among youth with obesity. However, to date, the literature is mixed as to whether resistance exercise training alone improves body weight, fat free mass, body composition, cardiovascular risk factors, or atherogenic lipoprotein profiles. The limited research in this area suggests potential sex differences in response to resistance training in youth. The literature is more consistent in demonstrating improvements in muscular fitness and insulin resistance independent of caloric restriction and weight loss. Although major health organizations recommend combining aerobic and resistance training, little research has examined the effects of their combination versus their individual effects, thus it is unclear whether their combination is associated with benefits that extend beyond those of either exercise modality alone. The purpose of this review is to examine the effects of resistance exercise on body composition and the health risk factors associated with cardiovascular disease and type 2 diabetes in youth with obesity.
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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.010 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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".