Exercise breaks prevent attenuation in cerebrovascular function following an acute bout of uninterrupted sitting in healthy children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of an acute bout of prolonged sitting with and without exercise breaks on cerebrovascular function in 7‐ to 13‐year‐old children. Forty‐two children and adolescents were recruited to a crossover trial, with 15 girls (mean age 10.1 ± 2.5 years) and 16 boys (mean age 10.5 ± 1.3 years) completing the two trial conditions: SIT, uninterrupted sitting for 3 h and CYCLE, 3 h of sitting interrupted hourly with a 10‐min moderate intensity exercise break. Cerebrovascular function was measured Pre and Post SIT and CYCLE from blood flow (), diameter, and shear rate of the internal carotid artery (ICA) at rest and in response to CO2. Blood velocity in the middle (MCA) and posterior (PCA) cerebral arteries was assessed at rest, during a neurovascular coupling task (NVC) and in response to CO2. We demonstrate that SIT but not CYCLE reduced ICA cerebrovascular reactivity to CO2 (%Δ ICA /Δ end‐tidal CO2: SIT: Pre 5.0 ± 2.4%/mmHg to Post 3.3 ± 2.8%/mmHg vs. CYCLE: Pre 4.4 ± 2.3%/mmHg to Post 5.3 ± 3.4%/mmHg, P = 0.05) and slowed the MCA blood velocity onset response time to hypercapnia (SIT: Pre 57.2 ± 32.6 s to Post 76.6 ± 55.2 s, vs. CYCLE: Pre 64.1 ± 40.4 s to Post 52.3 ± 28.8 s, P = 0.05). There were no changes in NVC. Importantly, breaking up prolonged sitting with hourly exercise breaks prevented the reductions in cerebrovascular reactivity to CO2 and the slowed intracranial blood velocity onset response time to hypercapnia apparent with uninterrupted sitting in children.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".