Sports and Functional Training Improve a Subset of Obesity-Related Health Parameters in Adolescents: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To investigate the effects of two different modes of physical activity on body composition, physical fitness, cardiometabolic risk, and psychological responses in female adolescents participating in a multi-disciplinary program. The 12-week randomized intervention included 25-adolescents with overweight divided into two groups: sports practice-SPG and functional training-FTG. The SPG intervention was divided into three sports: basketball, handball, and futsal. SPG participants performed one sport 3-times/week, over the course of 1 month. The FTG performed concurrent exercises 3-times/week. This study was registered in Clinical Trials Registry Platform under number: RBR-45ywtg and registered in Local Ethics Committee number: 2,505.200/2018. The intensity of physical exercises-PE was matched between groups by the rating of perceived exertion. The primary outcome was body composition, and secondary outcomes were physical fitness, cardiometabolic risk, and psychological responses. There was a significant time-effect for body mass, body mass index, and low-density lipoprotein (LDL-c), all being reduced. There were increases over time for musculoskeletal mass, aerobic fitness, and high-density lipoprotein (HDL-c) (p < 0.05). There was a group time interaction with body fat percentage being lower post-intervention in the SPG (p < 0.05). No significant differences were observed for the other variables. Both physical activity models were effective in improving a subset of obesity-related health parameters. The findings should be extended by further investigation using more sophisticated measures of energy expenditure. Clinical Trial Registration: https://ensaiosclinicos.gov.br/ , identifier: RBR-45ywtg.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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".