Cardiorespiratory Fitness Improvements Following Low‐Frequency Training Are Not Inferior to High‐Frequency Training Matched for Intensity and Volume
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Epidemiological evidence suggests low‐frequency physical activity provides health benefits, but the physiological impacts of weekly training frequency are understudied. We investigated whether “Weekend Warrior” (WW) training was inferior to traditional, high‐frequency (HF) training for improving maximal oxygen uptake (V̇O2max). The secondary aim was to assess integrative physiological adaptations to each protocol. Twenty‐eight sedentary‐to‐recreationally‐active adults aged 18–45 years (14 males and 14 females) were randomized to perform 8‐weeks of HF or WW training on a cycle ergometer (either four or two sessions weekly, respectively), consisting of continuous and interval exercise, with intensity and volume matched between groups. WW training was not inferior to HF training for improving V̇O2max (mean ± standard deviation; WW: 43.5 ± 6.5 vs. 47.8 ± 6.4 mL/kg/min; HF: 42.3 ± 6.2 vs. 47.3 ± 6.7; main effect of training, p < 0.001). Severe domain cycling time‐to‐task‐failure also increased in both groups (WW: 3.7 ± 1.6 vs. 8.6 ± 3.2 min; HF: 3.5 ± 0.9 vs. 7.7 ± 2.8; main effect of training: p < 0.001). Frequency did not affect improvements in hemoglobin mass (WW: 771 ± 203 vs. 790 ± 189 g; HF: 754 ± 185 vs. 765 ± 202; main effect of training: p = 0.043) or skeletal muscle oxidative capacity (WW: 0.034 ± 0.008 vs. 0.045 ± 0.015 s−1; HF: 0.036 ± 0.011 vs. 0.041 ± 0.010; main effect of training: p = 0.002), nor did it influence improvements in cardiorespiratory, substrate oxidation, voluntary muscle contractile, and perceptual responses to submaximal exercise (interaction effect: p > 0.05 for all outcomes). Eight weeks of training improved V̇O2max and a wide range of physiological outcomes with no difference between training frequencies, suggesting that the distribution of weekly exercise volume has a limited effect during short‐term training. Trial Registration: This trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05908578
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.003 | 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".