Effect of Moderate Versus Vigorous Exercise Intensity on Body Composition in Young Untrained Adults: The Activating Brown Adipose Tissue Through Exercise (ACTIBATE) Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present study aimed to investigate the effect of a 24-week aerobic + resistance training programs at moderate versus vigorous intensity on body composition, and the persistence of the changes after a 10-month free-living period, in young untrained adults. This report is based on a secondary analysis from the activating brown adipose tissue through exercise (ACTIBATE) single-center unblinded randomized controlled trial. A total of 144 young adults (65.6% women) aged 18-25 years were randomly allocated to three different groups: (a) aerobic + resistance exercise training program based on the international physical activity recommendations at vigorous intensity (Ex-Vigorous group), (b) at moderate intensity (Ex-Moderate group), and (c) control group (no exercise). Body composition outcomes were determined by a dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry scanner. Both Ex-Vigorous and Ex-Moderate decreased body weight, fat mass, and visceral adipose tissue mass in a similar manner (all p < .04). After a 10-month free-living period, these parameters returned to baseline levels in both exercise groups (all ps < .03). No differences between the exercise groups and the control group were noted in lean mass changes (all ps > .1). A 24-week aerobic + resistance training intervention based on the international physical activity recommendations was enough to improve body weight, fat mass, and visceral adipose tissue mass in untrained young adults, independently of the exercise intensity (moderate vs. vigorous).
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".