Trial reportMedicine and science in sports and exercise2016
Motor-Driven (Passive) Cycling: A Potential Physical Inactivity Countermeasure?
Trial report in Medicine and science in sports and exercise, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
unlabelledWe have previously shown that motor-driven (passive) stationary cycling elevates energy expenditure (EE). PURPOSE: This study aimed to quantify how acute passive cycling affects glucose and insulin responses to an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) and basic cognition compared with sitting and moderate-intensity active cycling.
methodsTwenty-four physically inactive healthy males completed three trials in randomized order involving 30-min conditions of sitting, passive cycling, and moderate-intensity cycling. During each condition, EE was measured, and participants performed cognitive tests. After each condition, a 2-h OGTT was performed.
resultsEE was significantly higher during the cycling conditions compared with sitting (1.36 ± 0.58 and 6.50 ± 1.73 kcal·min greater than sitting for passive and moderate-intensity, respectively). A significant correlation was found between body fat percentage and postsitting OGTT 2-h postplasma glucose (r = 0.30, P < 0.05); thus, participants were divided into lean (n = 11) and nonlean (n = 13) groups. In the nonlean group, compared with sitting, passive cycling lowered 2-h postplasma glucose (7.7 ± 1.3 vs 6.9 ± 1.6 mmol·L, respectively, P < 0.05), and the Matsuda whole-body insulin sensitivity index (WBISI) was higher (2.74 ± 0.86 vs 3.36 ± 1.08, P < 0.05). In addition, passive and moderate-intensity cycling had similar beneficial effects on 2-h postplasma glucose and WBISI. Cognitive performance did not significantly differ between the sitting and passive cycling conditions.
conclusionsTwo-hour postplasma glucose was lower and WBISI after acute passive cycling was higher in nonlean participants. Given that and the increase in EE without changes in cognitive performance, we propose passive cycling as a promising intervention to counteract some of the deleterious effects of prolonged sitting in the workplace.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.