Weight Loss after 12 Weeks of Exercise and/or Nutritional Guidance Is Not Obligatory for Induced Changes in Local Fat/Lean Mass Indexes in Adults with Excess of Adiposity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objectives of this secondary analysis are (1) to investigate the differential effects of exercise training modalities–high-intensity interval training (HIIT), resistance training (RT), combined training (CT = HIIT + RT), and/or nutritional guidance (NG) alone–on local fat/lean mass indexes in adults with excess of adiposity; (2) to identify the individual patterns of response based on either a clinical criterion of weight loss (≥5%) and/or technical error (TE) of measurement of local fat/lean mass indexes; and (3) to assess the individual change for body composition parameters assigned either to HIIT, RT, CT, and/or NG groups utilizing a TE. A 12-week trial was conducted in 55 participants randomized to one of the four interventions. The primary outcome was clinical change in body weight (i.e., weight loss of ≥5%). Secondary outcomes included change in ratio of android and gynoid fat mass, as well as local fat and lean mass indexes (arms, trunk, and legs), before and after intervention. The main findings from the current analysis revealed that (i) after 12 weeks of follow-up, significant decreases in several body composition indexes were found including body weight, arm, trunk, and legs fat mass, and android and gynecoid fat mass were observed in HIIT, RT, and CT groups (p < 0.05); (ii) a significant proportion of individuals showed a positive response following 12 weeks of training, led by the HIIT group with 44% and followed by RT with 39% in 9 indexes; (iii) the HIIT group showed lowest rates of adverse responders with (6%); and (iv) the individual patterns of response utilizing clinically meaningful weight loss were not necessarily associated with the corresponding individual training-induced changes in body composition indexes in adults with excess of adiposity. Overall, the study suggests that HIIT has an important ability to reduce the prevalence of non-response to improve body composition indexes.
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 | 0.000 | 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".