Abstract 4361819: Sex Differences in Response to Endurance Training
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Few studies have systematically evaluated whether adaptations to endurance training differ by sex. We assessed sex differences in cardiopulmonary, body composition, and metabolic adaptations among male and female sedentary adults following a 20-week endurance training program. Hypothesis: Male and female participants will demonstrate equal cardiovascular and metabolic adaptations in response to an identical dose of supervised endurance training. Methods: HERITAGE Family Study participants (56% female, mean age: 34 years) completed a supervised endurance training program, with cardiopulmonary exercise tests, body composition, and metabolic assessments performed at baseline (n=834) and after the training period (n=720). Two-sample t-tests were used to compare exercise responses among male and female participants. An external exercise training intervention study involving 149 individuals with abdominal adiposity (63% female, mean age: 52 years) was used for validation of training-related adaptations. Results: We observed sex differences in several (18/65) training-related adaptations in HERITAGE. Notably, while male participants exhibited higher VO2max at baseline (36 vs 27 ml/kg/min, p=5x10-49), female participants demonstrated greater improvements following the training intervention (+20 vs +16%, p=2x10-7). From a body composition and metabolic standpoint, male participants exhibited greater reductions in body fat percentage (-4 vs -2%, p=0.004) and visceral fat (-6 vs -2%, p=0.002), and a three-fold greater increase in insulin sensitivity (+17 vs +6%, p=0.009) compared to female participants. In the validation cohort, male participants also demonstrated greater training-related improvements in body mass index, waist circumference, and insulin/glucose responses to an oral glucose tolerance test. Conclusions: This study highlights important sex differences in adaptations to endurance training. Specifically, while female individuals demonstrated greater trainability in VO2max, male individuals exhibited larger improvements in body composition and glucose/insulin metabolism.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.010 | 0.001 |
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".