MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

High-Intensity Interval And Moderate-Intensity Continuous Training Improve Maximal Oxygen Uptake In Parkinson’S Disease Patients

2024· article· en· W4402663767 on OpenAlexaffabout
Devin G. McCarthy, Muhammad M. Kathia, Sergiu‐Gabriel Duplea, Julian C. Bommarito, Avery Hinks, Elira Leake, Julia Shannon, Jenna Pitman, Alex Coates, Joshua T. Slysz, Carlin Katerberg, Leslie Anne Witton, Barbara S. Connolly, Lori Ann Vallis, Jamie F. Burr, Geoffrey A. Power, Philip J. Millar

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMuscle activation and electromyography studies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHigh-intensity interval trainingIntensity (physics)Parkinson's diseaseInterval (graph theory)MedicineCardiologyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationDiseasePsychologyInternal medicineMathematicsPhysicsCombinatorics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Parkinson’s disease (PD) is the second most common neurodegenerative disease in the United States. Aerobic exercise training is a recommended lifestyle interventions for people with PD, but it is unclear whether an optimal exercise program exists. High-intensity interval training (HIIT) has been shown to improve 6-min walk performance more than moderate-intensity continuous training (MICT) in PD, but whether this is secondary to improvements in peak oxygen uptake (VO2peak) or gait mechanics was not assessed. PURPOSE: The current study tested the hypothesis that VO2peak would be increased to a greater extent after 10 weeks of HIIT vs MICT. METHODS: Twenty-eight participants with PD (11 females; 67 ± 7 years) were randomly assigned to complete 10 weeks of supervised HIIT (n = 15) or MICT (n = 13) comprising three exercise sessions per week. HIIT involved 10, 1-min bouts of cycling at ~90% peak power output, each separated by 1-min at 10% peak power output. MICT involved 30-50 min of cycling at 60% peak power output. An incremental cycling test to volitional exhaustion was completed pre- and post-training to determine VO2peak, the first ventilatory threshold, and respiratory compensation point. RESULTS: Respiratory exchange ratio at VO2peak pre- and post-training was 1.12 ± 0.13 and 1.11 ± 0.10 for the HIIT group and 1.08 ± 0.15 and 1.12 ± 0.12 for the MICT group, respectively. VO2peak was higher following training (MICT: 1.63 ± 0.59 to 1.75 ± 0.57 L/min; HIIT: 1.79 ± 0.57 to 2.07 ± 0.67 L/min; main effect of time, p < 0.001). The increase in VO2peak per kg body mass was not statistically greater in HIIT vs. MICT (Δ3.7 ± 3.7 vs 1.7 ± 3.2 ml/kg/min, p = 0.10). Power output at VO2peak was 15 ± 5 W higher following training in both groups (p < 0.01). Ventilatory threshold one (MICT, Pre = 1082 ± 372, Post = 1126 ± 331 ml/min, n = 11; HIIT, Pre = 1159 ± 91, Post = 1329 ± 201 ml/min, n = 13) and respiratory compensation point (MICT, 1492 ± 593, Post = 1568 ± 513 ml/min, n = 5; HIIT, 1791 ± 405, Post = 1986 ± 475 ml/min, n = 7) were unaffected by training (p > 0.06) or training x group (p > 0.33 for all). CONCLUSIONS: Ten weeks of exercise training improved VO2peak in PD patients. HIIT may have elicited a larger, clinically meaningful improvement in VO2peak compared to MICT, when considering that a clinically meaningful difference in VO2peak could be as low as 1.5 ml/kg/min. Parkinson Canada Pilot Project Grant (2018-00186)

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: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 designNon-randomized trial
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
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise→Same topicMuscle activation and electromyography studies→French-language works237,207→