MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3021544884 · doi:10.1210/jendso/bvaa046.326

MON-042 The Effect of Exercise Training on Reproductive and Cardiometabolic Outcomes in Women with Polycystic Ovary Syndrome: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial

2020· article· en· W3021544884 on OpenAlexaff
Jamie L. Benham, Jane E. Booth, Steve Doucette, Christine M. Friedenreich, Doreen M. Rabi, Ronald J. Sigal

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Endocrine Society · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOvarian function and disorders
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePolycystic ovaryWaistInternal medicineBlood pressureBody mass indexOvulationRandomized controlled trialAerobic exerciseInterval trainingInsulin resistanceEndocrinologyPhysical therapyObstetricsObesityHormone

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Exercise may improve cardiometabolic, reproductive and psychological outcomes in women with Polycystic Ovary Syndrome (PCOS). Clinical Practice Guidelines recommend exercise to treat PCOS, but the most effective exercise prescription is unclear. The aim of this randomized controlled trial was to evaluate the effects of six months of thrice weekly high-intensity interval training (HIIT) and continuous aerobic exercise training (CAET) programs compared with no exercise in previously-inactive women aged 18–40 years with PCOS. The primary outcome was change in ovulation rate. Ovulation was assessed with daily at home ovulation prediction kits, and confirmed with serum progesterone levels. Fisher’s exact test was used to compare groups. Secondary outcomes included change in BMI, waist circumference, blood pressure, A1C, fasting glucose, fasting insulin, and lipids and were analyzed using repeated measures mixed models. 47 women were randomly assigned to no exercise control (n=17), HIIT (n=16), or CAET (n=14). 22/33 (66.7%) women ovulated during the intervention period: no exercise: 8/12 (66.7%), HIIT: 8/11 (72.7%), and CAET: 6/10 (60%); NS between groups. BMI decreased significantly in the CAET group compared with control (-1 kg/m2, p=0.01) and compared with HIIT (-0.9 kg/m2, p=0.04). Mean waist circumference decreased significantly in all groups with no significant difference between groups. There were no significant within- or between- group changes for body weight. No within- or between group differences were identified for mean blood pressure, A1C, fasting glucose, fasting insulin, or triglycerides. Mean LDL-C was significantly different between the HIIT and CAET groups (-0.33 mmol/L, p=0.03), as LDL-C decreased in the HIIT group but not in the CAET group. HDL-C increased in the HIIT group compared with the no exercise group (0.18 mmol/L, p=0.04), with no significant difference between the CAET and no exercise groups (p=0.47). In conclusion, CAET and HIIT interventions in women with PCOS did not affect ovulation rates. CAET and HIIT both were effective at improving anthropometrics and some cardiometabolic health markers in women with PCOS. Further studies are needed to determine optimal exercise prescriptions for reproductive, anthropometric and cardiometabolic outcomes in women with PCOS.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.301

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.244 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Endocrine SocietySame topicOvarian function and disordersFrench-language works237,207