Acute exercise effects on postprandial fat oxidation: meta-analysis and systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this systematic review was to synthesize and evaluate current literature examining the effects of exercise on postprandial fat oxidation, as well as to provide future direction. A quantitative review was performed using meta-analytic methods. A moderator analysis was performed to investigate potential variables that could influence the effect of exercise on postprandial fat oxidation. Fifty-six effects from 26 studies were retrieved. There was a moderate effect of exercise on postprandial fat oxidation (Cohen’s d = 0.58 (95% CI, 0.39 to 0.78)). Moderator analysis revealed that sex, age, weight status, training status, exercise type, exercise intensity, timing of exercise, and composition of the meal challenge significantly affected the impact of prior exercise on postprandial fat oxidation. The moderator analysis also indicated that most previous studies have investigated the impact of prior moderate-intensity endurance exercise on postprandial fat oxidation in young, healthy, lean men. Suggested priorities for future research in this area include (i) an examination of sex differences in and/or female-specific aspects of postprandial metabolism; (ii) a comprehensive evaluation of exercise modalities, intensities, and durations; and (iii) a wider variety of test meal compositions, especially those with higher fat content. Novelty A systematic review of the impact of exercise on postprandial fat oxidation was performed using meta-analytic methods. Analysis revealed a moderate effect of exercise on postprandial fat oxidation. The presented data support a need for future studies to investigate sex differences and to include comprehensive evaluations of exercise modalities, intensities, and duration.
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 | 0.014 | 0.044 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.016 | 0.027 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".