Measuring the Effects of Massage on Exercise Performance and Cardiopulmonary Response in Children With and Without Heart Disease: A Pilot Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Congenital heart disease, a common and serious birth defect, affects 8 per 1000 live-born infants. Decreased exercise capacity and development of obesity is common in this population. These children may benefit from therapies, such as massage therapy, that could enhance cardiovascular and skeletal muscle function when they exercise. PURPOSE: A pilot study conducted at the pediatric cardiology clinic of the Mattel Children's Hospital of the University of California-Los Angeles examined the safety and feasibility of measuring the effects of pre-exercise massage on exercise performance and cardiopulmonary response in children with and without heart disease. PARTICIPANTS AND METHODS: SIXTEEN CHILDREN (MEAN AGE: 9.2 ± 2.2 years) participated in the study. Ten participants had various forms of heart disease, and six children were healthy. A female certified massage therapist with specialized training in pediatric massage provided a 30-minute massage to the participants. Using a standard protocol, each participant underwent two exercise tests: one test with and one without pre-exercise massage. Heart rate, blood pressure, and oxygen uptake (VO(2)) were measured in the participants. RESULTS: All recruited participants completed the study. No adverse events occurred during any of the exercise tests or massage sessions. Measurements during exercise with or without a preceding massage were compared, and the pre-exercise massage condition yielded a significantly higher heart rate and higher minute ventilation. Measurements during exercise in children with heart disease and in healthy participants showed no significant differences in peak heart rate, blood pressure, peak VO(2), peak work rate, minute ventilation, or respiratory quotient. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, peak heart rate, peak VO(2), and peak minute ventilation were higher when children received a massage before exercise testing. Larger studies will be needed to investigate the strength of this finding. Future studies should include measurements of anxiety and psychological factors in addition to cardiopulmonary measures.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".