Cardiac autonomic disturbance following resistance and sprint-interval exercises in non-obese and obese young men
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examined the alterations of heart rate variability (HRV) following iso-duration resistance (RES) and sprint-interval exercises (SIE) by comparing with that of non-exercise control (CON) in 14 non-obese (NOB) and 15 obese (OB) young men. Time and frequency domain measures as well as nonlinear metrics of HRV were assessed before and immediately after exercise, and during every 20 min until 120 min post-exercise. The variables during the first 4 h of actual sleep time at night, and the period of 12–14 h post-exercise were also measured. All trials were scheduled at 20:00. It was found that RES and SIE attenuated the HRV in both NOB and OB ( P < 0.05), and the attenuated HRV restored progressively during subsequent recovery. Although the changes in HRV indices among various time points during the recovery period and its interaction across RES, SIE, and CON were not different between NOB and OB, the restoration of the declined HRV indices to corresponding CON level in the 2 exercise trials in OB appeared to be sluggish in relative to NOB. Notwithstanding, post-exercise HRV that recorded during actual sleep at night and during 12–14 h apart from exercise were unvaried among the 3 trials in both groups ( P > 0.05). These findings suggest that obesity is likely to be a factor hindering the removal of exercise-induced cardiac autonomic disturbance in young men. Nonetheless, the declined HRV following both the RES and SIE protocols was well restored after a resting period of ∼10 h regardless of obesity. The study was registered at ISRCTN as https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN88544091 .
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".