MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399388103

Effect of 8 weeks of resistance training on hemostasis indeces and lipid profile in adult men

2014· article· en· W4399388103 on OpenAlexaff
Amouzad Mahdirejei H, Abolfazle Aghababaeian, M Mirsaiedii, Fadaei Reyhan Abadei S, Abbaspour Seyedii A

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPhysical Education and Training Studies
Canadian institutionsCanadian Society for Exercise Physiology
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHemostasisResistance trainingMedicineInternal medicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background and Objective: Fluctuation in the homeostasis system is one of the main causes of heart attacks. There are contradectry reports regarding the effect of regular exercise, particularly resistance training on hemostasis indeces. This study was done to determine the effect of 8 weeks of resistance training on hemostasis indeces and lipid profile in adult men. Methods: In this clinical trail study, 16 adult men were randomly divided into interventional and control groups. Subjects in interventional group participated in a resistance training program including a period 3 days a week for 8 weeks session. Body mass index, level of fibrinogen, protrombin time (PT), partial thromboplastin time (PTT), platelet count, D-dimer fibrinolytic factor, Cholesterol, Triglyceride, HDL and LDL were measured for each subject. Results: After 8 weeks of resistance training, the level of fibrinogen, PT, PTT and platelets count were significantly reduced and D-dimer fibrinolytic factor increased in interventional group in compared to controls (P<0.05). Serum level of Cholesterol, Triglyceride, HDL and LDL had no significant change in interventional group in comparsion with the controls. Conclusion: Resistance training reduces hemostasis indeces in adult men.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.271
GPT teacher head0.623
Teacher spread0.351 · 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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)Same topicPhysical Education and Training StudiesFrench-language works237,207