Acute Exercise‐Induced Energy Expenditure and Substrate Oxidation Rates Might Not Be Associated With Subsequent Appetitive Responses in Adolescents Living With Obesity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: While acute exercise has been shown to alter subsequent energy intake in adolescents with obesity, the role of the exercise-induced energy expenditure and substrate oxidation remains unknown. The present study investigates the effect of energy expenditure and substrate oxidation rates during an acute walking exercise on subsequent appetitive responses in adolescents with obesity. METHODS: ] in a randomized order. Energy expenditure and substrate use were assessed at rest and during exercise using indirect calorimetry. Subsequent ad libitum energy intake, appetite sensations and food reward were assessed. RESULTS: Post-exercise energy intake was reduced on EX compared with CON [1083 ± 253 vs. 950 ± 226 kcal; p = 0.041], with reduced absolute protein intake [p = 0.011]. None of the appetite sensations differed between conditions. Pre-lunch explicit liking for fat decreased on EX compared with CON [p = 0.045], the implicit and explicit wanting for fat [p = 0.047 and p = 0.025 respectively] and explicit wanting for taste [p = 0.012] decreased from pre to post lunch after exercise. Energy Expenditure, fat and carbohydrate oxidation rates during exercise were not associated with subsequent appetitive measurements. CONCLUSION: Exercise-induced energy expenditure and substrate might not be associated with the short-term control of appetite and energy intake in adolescents with obesity, which remains to be confirmed by further studies evaluating the effect of various exercises inducing specific predominant fuel sources.
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) | 0.001 | 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".