MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3189341265 · doi:10.3389/fphys.2021.715881

HIIT'ing or MISS'ing the Optimal Management of Polycystic Ovary Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of High- Versus Moderate-Intensity Exercise Prescription

2021· review· en· W3189341265 on OpenAlexafffund
Cory T. Richards, Victoria L. Meah, Philip E. James, Aled Rees, Rachel N. Lord

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Physiology · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOvarian function and disorders
Canadian institutionsWomen and Children’s Health Research InstituteUniversity of Alberta
FundersInstitute of Human Development, Child and Youth HealthWaterloo FoundationCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchWomen and Children's Health Research InstituteChildren's Health Research Institute
KeywordsAlgorithmMedicinePolycystic ovaryCardiorespiratory fitnessInternal medicineMathematicsMachine learningInsulin resistanceComputer scienceObesity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Polycystic Ovary syndrome (PCOS) is a metabolic disorder associated with increased cardiovascular disease risk. Exercise is an effective treatment strategy to manage symptoms and reduce long-term health risk. High-intensity interval training (HIIT) has been suggested as a more efficient exercise mode in PCOS; however, it is not clear whether HIIT is superior to moderate intensity steady state exercise (MISS). Methods: We synthesized available data through a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the effectiveness of isolated HIIT and MISS exercise interventions. Our primary outcome measures were cardiorespiratory fitness and insulin resistance, measured using <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M1"><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mrow><mml:mtext>V</mml:mtext></mml:mrow><mml:mo>˙</mml:mo></mml:mover></mml:math> O 2max and HOMA-IR respectively. Results: A total of 16 studies were included. Moderate-quality evidence from 16 studies identified significant improvements in <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M2"><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mrow><mml:mtext>V</mml:mtext></mml:mrow><mml:mo>˙</mml:mo></mml:mover></mml:math> O 2max following MISS (Δ = 1.081 ml/kg/min, p &amp;lt; 0.001, n = 194), but not HIIT (Δ = 0.641 ml/kg/min, p = 0.128, n = 28). Neither HIIT nor MISS improved HOMA-IR [(Δ = −0.257, p = 0.374, n = 60) and (Δ = −0.341, p = 0.078, n = 159), respectively]. Discussion: A significant improvement in <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M3"><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mrow><mml:mtext>V</mml:mtext></mml:mrow><mml:mo>˙</mml:mo></mml:mover></mml:math> O 2max was evident following MISS, but not HIIT exercise in women with PCOS. This contrasts with previous literature in healthy and clinical cohorts that report superior benefits of HIIT. Therefore, based on available moderate-quality evidence, HIIT exercise does not provide superior outcomes in <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M4"><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mrow><mml:mtext>V</mml:mtext></mml:mrow><mml:mo>˙</mml:mo></mml:mover></mml:math> O 2max compared with MISS, although larger high-quality interventions are needed to fully address this. Additional dietary/pharmacological interventions may be required in conjunction with exercise to improve insulin sensitivity.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.750
Threshold uncertainty score0.967

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0110.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations15
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in PhysiologySame topicOvarian function and disordersFrench-language works237,207