Substrate Oxidation Is Altered by Obesity During Submaximal Cycling in Prepubertal and Early Pubertal Children: A Quality Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To examine substrate oxidation in prepubertal and early pubertal children as a function of body weight, body composition, and sex during an exhaustive cycling test. METHODS: This study included 320 children in prepubertal and early puberty (Tanner stage 1 or 2; n = 188 males) who completed a minimum of 4 stages (2-5 min/stage) of an adapted version of the McMaster exhaustive exercise protocol on an upright cycle ergometer. Substrate utilization, relative to individual VO2peak, was determined using VO2 and VCO2 data, obtained with breath-by-breath gas analysis during exercise. RESULTS: Both peak (mg/kg lean body mass·min) and submaximal lipid oxidation (mg/kg lean body mass·min) were highest (P < .01) in children with healthy weight (HW), then overweight, and lowest in obese (OB). Both females with HW (compared with males with HW) and females with OB (compared with males with OB) had higher (P < .01) peak and submaximal lipid oxidation. In children with OB, fat-free mass correlated positively (P < .01) with submaximal lipid oxidation (r = .50). In contrast, in children with HW and overweight, fat-free mass correlated positively (P < .01) with carbohydrate oxidation (r = .52 and r = .47, respectively). CONCLUSION: Obesity during childhood may alter substrate oxidation during exercise. These results may have implications in the implementation of exercise programs in prepubertal or early puberty to control adiposity.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".