MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Changes In Fitness Levels Prevent Against The Adverse Responder Phenotype In Individuals Living With Type 2 Diabetes

2023· article· en· W4387053602 on OpenAlexaff
Martin Sénéchal, Neil M. Johannsen, Timothy S. Church

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Fredericton
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBody mass indexWaistInternal medicineTreadmillType 2 diabetesDiabetes mellitusAdverse effectAerobic exerciseGlycated hemoglobinPhysical fitnessBody fat percentagePhysical therapyEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Exercise training is a cornerstone for type 2 diabetes management. Although the terms exercise non-responder and adverse responder have been coined to describe the absence of benefits or deterioration with exercise training, little is known about the potential predictors associated with several responder phenotypes. PURPOSE: To investigate the associations between Type 2 diabetes responder phenotype and changes in body composition and fitness levels following 9 months of exercise training. METHODS: Participants (n = 188) with Type 2 diabetes mellitus [glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) ≥6.5%) were randomized to a control group or 9 months of exercise training. Changes in body composition were evaluated using body weight, body mass index, waist circumference, percent body fat, and total fat mass. Changes in aerobic fitness were evaluated using treadmill time to exhaustion (TTE) and the highest estimated metabolic equivalent tasks (METs) during a treadmill-graded exercise test. Participants randomized to exercise training were categorized to responder phenotype based on the change HbA1c: 1) adverse responder (HbA1c > 1% CV), 2) non-responder (HbA1c ± 1% CV, and 3) responder (HbA1c < 1% CV). RESULTS: The proportion of adverse responders, non-responders, and responders was 38.8%, 16.5% and 44.5%. Participants were more likely to be a responder in comparison to the control group if they improved their body composition (weight, body mass index, waist circumference, percent body fat, and total fat mass (all p ≤ 0.05)). Participants who increased their fitness level (TTE or estimated METs) were 1.93 (95%CI: 1.43-2.58) and 4.50 (95%CI:1.22-9.25) times more likely to be exercise responders than the control group. Finally, only participants who changed TTE [1.35 (95%CI:1.12-1.60)] or estimated METs [1.99 (95%CI:1.25-3.16)] were more likely to be a responder compared to an adverse responder phenotype after adjusting for confounders. CONCLUSIONS: Even if exercise normally leads to an improvement in HbA1c, some individuals do not improve beyond the coefficient of variation in the measure. More studies are needed to enhance responder phenotype in individuals with type 2 diabetes. Our secondary analysis suggests that improvement in fitness is associated with a better responder phenotype in type 2 diabetes individuals.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.252 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise→Same topicDiabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins→French-language works237,207→