Active-Arm Passive-Leg Exercise Improves Cardiovascular Function in Spinal Cord Injury
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In a 43-yr-old male subject with a chronic T3 AIS A spinal cord injury, the acute cardiorespiratory responses to active upper-extremity exercise alone and combined active-arm passive-leg exercise (AAPLE) were investigated, along with the cardiorespiratory, cardiac, vascular, and body composition responses to a 6-wk AAPLE interval training intervention. AAPLE elicited superior acute maximal cardiorespiratory responses compared with upper-extremity exercise alone. In response to a 6-wk interval training regimen, AAPLE caused a 25% increase in peak oxygen uptake, a 10% increase in resting stroke volume, and a 4-fold increase in brachial artery blood flow. Conversely, there were no changes in femoral arterial function, body composition, or bone mineral density in response to training. As a potential clinical intervention, AAPLE may be advantageous over other forms of currently available exercise, owing to the minimal setup time and cost involved and the nonreliance on specialized equipment that is required for other exercise modalities.
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".