Strength And Body Composition Changes In Response To Resistance Training In Overweight Latino Adolescent Males
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The prevalence of overweight among youth continues to increase worldwide. Efficacious physical activity interventions are needed to improve the health status of this population. PURPOSE To examine the effects of a 16-week periodized resistance training program on strength and body composition in overweight Latino adolescent males. METHODS Twenty-two overweight adolescents (age: 15.2 ± 1.7 yrs, Tanner stage: 3–5, BMI percentile: 97.7 ± 2.8) were randomized to a twice weekly progressive, periodized, resistance training (RT) program (n=11) or a non-exercising control group (C) (n=11). At 0- and 16-weeks, bench press and leg press strength were determined by 1-repetition maximum and total body composition was assessed via dual energy X-ray absorptiometry. RESULTS Youth in the RT group attended ∼96% of the 32 exercise sessions. Repeated measures analysis of variance revealed that the RT group significantly increased strength compared to non-exercising C in the bench press (24.3% vs. 7.4%, p = 0.01) and leg press (27.7% vs. 4.7%, p = 0.003). No significant group differences over time were observed in total fat mass, or total lean tissue mass, but a trend in percent fat decrease was observed in the RT group vs. C group (−2.5% vs. −0.6%, p = 0.078). CONCLUSION These findings illustrate that resistance training is a viable exercise strategy to increase strength in overweight adolescent males. Furthermore, the high adherence rate in the youth who completed the RT program suggests that resistance training is well received in this group. Further studies are necessary to determine whether variations in training frequency, intensity and/or duration improve body composition and if changes in body composition are required to elicit improvements in disease risk in this population.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".