improvement of cardiorespiratory fitness in healthy women after a 12-week Classical Pilates training
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aims: to evaluate the effects of 12 weeks of Pilates training (Classical Method) on cardiorespiratory fitness and heart rate responses of healthy sedentary women. Method: fifteen women (average age 29±4) performed 12 weeks of Pilates training for 60 minutes, three times per week (Pilates Group). Thirteen women (average age 29±5) as controls maintained their routine activities (Control Group). The exercises’ introduction was by the degree of difficulty with changes in the plane of movements; smaller base of support; spinal rotations and extensions; use of abdominal muscles in prone position. Heart rate was monitored and recorded during all sessions using a heart frequency meter. Results: ANOVA analysis results revealed significant difference in Pilates Group (p < 0.05) between pre and post measures of VO2peak (+13%), fat percentage (- 3.3%), free fat mass (+ 2.8 kg), and muscular endurance in the abdominal area (+61%), lower limbs (+75%) and upper limbs (+68%). The percent of Maximum Heart Rate achieved in the 6th (79.25%) and 12th (79.86%) weeks of training increased from the first week (73.4%). Physical fitness in Control Group remained unchanged. Conclusion: twelve weeks of Pilates training positively affected overall physical fitness in previously sedentary healthy women. Furthermore, the increase in VO2peak and achieved Maximum Heart Rate was significant even with no specific aerobic training.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".