Interindividual variation in cardiometabolic health outcomes following 6 months of endurance training in youth at risk of type 2 diabetes mellitus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study determined the interindividual variation in the cardiometabolic response to 6 months of moderate or vigorous intensity exercise training (ET) among youth at risk for type 2 diabetes mellitus. Youth were randomized to moderate intensity ET (45–55% heart rate reserve; n = 31), vigorous intensity ET (70–85% heart rate reserve; n = 37), or control (n = 36). Only those attending ≥70% of ET sessions were included. Cardiometabolic measures included insulin sensitivity, hepatic triglyceride content, visceral adipose area, and cardiorespiratory fitness. The contribution of ET to interindividual variation was determined using the standard deviation of individual responses (SDIR) and considered meaningful if the SDIR surpassed the smallest worthwhile difference (SWD), calculated as 0.2 × the standard deviation of the control group baseline values. ET meaningfully contributed to the interindividual variation among changes in peak oxygen uptake following moderate (SDIR: 2.04) and vigorous (SDIR: 3.43) ET (SWD: 1.17 mL·kg fat free mass−1·min−1), body fat percentage and hepatic triglyceride content following moderate-intensity ET (SDIR: 1.64, SWD: 1.05%; SDIR: 10.08, SWD: 1.06%, respectively), and visceral fat mass following vigorous ET (SDIR: 11.06, SWD: 7.13 cm2). Variation in the changes in insulin sensitivity were not influenced by ET. The contribution of ET to interindividual variation appears to be influenced by the desired outcome and prescribed intensity. Trial registration at ClinicalTrials.gov (identifier no.: NCT00755547). Novelty: The contribution of exercise to interindividual variation following training depends on the outcome and exercise intensity. Increasing exercise intensity does not systematically reduce non-response among youth at risk for type 2 diabetes.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 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".