MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3118968814 · doi:10.3390/ijerph18010302

Effects of Online Bodyweight High-Intensity Interval Training Intervention and Health Education on the Mental Health and Cognition of Sedentary Young Females

2021· article· en· W3118968814 on OpenAlexaff
Yao Zhang, Beier Zhang, Liaoyan Gan, Limei Ke, Yingyao Fu, Qian Di, Xindong Ma

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPhysical Activity and Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNational Office for Philosophy and Social Sciences
KeywordsMedicineHigh-intensity interval trainingMental healthInterval trainingConfidence intervalPhysical therapyAnxietyCognitionRandomized controlled trialInternal medicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aimed to assess the effectiveness of an online high-intensity interval training (HIIT) intervention and health education on the behaviors, mental health, and cognitive function of sedentary young females. A single-blinded, six-week, randomized controlled pilot trial involving 70 sedentary young Chinese females, aged 18–30 years, was conducted. An intervention group (IG) (n = 33) underwent a HIIT intervention and health education, while a waitlist group (WG) (n = 37) only received health education. In pre-, mid-, and post-tests, both groups filled out questionnaires about physical activity, sedentary behavior, and mental health. Cognitive functions were assessed at the pre- and post-tests by computer-administered cognitive tests. A mixed-effect model with repeated measures was used to analyze outcomes of interest. The retention rate of the IG and WG was 100% and 78.38%, respectively. The IG were found to have significantly increased rates of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) (Mdiff = 940.61, p < 0.001, 95% confidence interval (95% CI): 576.67, 1304.55) from pre-test to post-test, while the WG demonstrated a more marked reduction in sedentary time (Mdiff = −73.02, p = 0.038, 95% CI: −141.90, −4.14) compared with the IG in the post-test. Moreover, anxiety and stress levels were shown to significantly reduce in the IG over the six-week period (Mdiff = −4.73, p = 0.002, 95% CI: −7.30, −2.15 and Mdiff = −5.09, p = 0.001, 95% CI: −8.29, −1.89, respectively). In addition, we observed a significant improvement in verbal ability (p = 0.008, ηp2 = 0.19) following the HIIT intervention and effects of the interaction with time on processing speed (p = 0.050, ηp2 = 0.10) and episodic memory (p = 0.048, ηp2 = 0.11). Moreover, the IG had better global cognitive performance than the WG in the post-test (Mdiff = 8.28, p = 0.003, 95% CI: 3.06, 13.50). In summary, both an online bodyweight HIIT intervention combined with health education, or health education alone, can effectively improve health-related behaviors, but the behavioral consequences may differ based on the emphasis of different intervention modalities. Furthermore, the “bodyweight HIIT plus health education” modality might be a more promising online intervention strategy to mitigate against negative emotions and improve cognitive function.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.130
GPT teacher head0.430
Teacher spread0.300 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNon-randomized 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

Citations37
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Environmental Research and Public HealthSame topicPhysical Activity and HealthFrench-language works237,207