Enhancing cardiometabolic health: unveiling the synergistic effects of high-intensity interval training with spirulina supplementation on selected adipokines, insulin resistance, and anthropometric indices in obese males
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This study investigated the combined effects of 12 weeks of high-intensity interval training (HIIT) and spirulina supplementation on adipokine levels, insulin resistance, anthropometric indices, and cardiorespiratory fitness in 44 obese males (aged 25–40 years). The participants were randomly assigned to one of four groups: control (CG), supplement (SG), training (TG), or training plus supplement (TSG). The intervention involved daily administration of either spirulina or a placebo and HIIT three times a week for the training groups. Anthropometric indices, HOMA-IR, VO2peak, and circulating adipokines (asprosin and lipocalin2, omentin-1, irisin, and spexin) were measured before and after the 12-week intervention. Post-intervention analysis indicated differences between the CG and the three interventional groups for body weight, fat-free mass (FFM), percent body fat (%BF), HOMA-IR, and adipokine levels (p < 0.05). TG and SG participants had increased VO2peak (p < 0.05). Spirulina supplementation with HIIT increased VO2peak, omentin-1, irisin, and spexin, while causing decreases in lipocalin-2 and asprosin levels and improvements in body composition (weight, %fat), BMI, and HOMA-IR. Notably, the combination of spirulina and HIIT produced more significant changes in circulating adipokines and cardiometabolic health in obese males compared to either supplementation or HIIT alone (p < 0.05). These findings highlight the synergistic benefits of combining spirulina supplementation with HIIT, showcasing their potential in improving various health parameters and addressing obesity-related concerns in a comprehensive manner.
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) | 0.001 | 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".