MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7101023432

doi:10.1155/2012/148729 Research Article Acute Exercise Increases Adiponectin Levels in Abdominally Obese Men

2012· article· en· W7101023432 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdipokines, Inflammation, and Metabolic Diseases
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAdiponectinWaistAerobic exerciseExercise physiologyPostmenopausal womenTreadmillSession (web analytics)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Copyright © 2012 Travis J. Saunders et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Objective. To examine the effect of acute and short-term (∼1 week) aerobic exercise training on plasma adiponectin levels in inac-tive, abdominally obese men. Materials and Methods. Inactive and abdominally obese men (n = 38, waist circumference ≥102 cm) recruited from Kingston, Canada were randomly allocated to perform three bouts of aerobic treadmill exercise at either low (50 % VO2 peak) or high (75 % VO2 peak) intensity during a 1-week period. Blood samples were taken before and after the first exercise session and 24–72 hours following the completion of the final exercise session. Results. Adiponectin levels were elevated immediately following an acute bout of exercise at both high and low intensities (High: 5.79 ± 0.42 versus 5.05 ± 0.41 ug/mL; Low: 5.24 ± 0.44 versus 4.37 ± 0.44 ug/mL, P < 0.05) and remained elevated following 30 minutes of rest. In comparison to baseline,

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)0.001
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.211
Threshold uncertainty score0.705

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2110.126

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.305 · 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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdipokines, Inflammation, and Metabolic Diseases→French-language works237,207→