MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The relationship between bed rest and sitting orthostatic intolerance in adults residing in chronic care facilities

2010· article· en· W1539185961 on OpenAlexafffund
Mary Fox, Souraya Sidani, Dina Brooks

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Nursing and Healthcare of Chronic Illness · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Syncope and Autonomic Disorders
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchCanadian Health Services Research FoundationCanadian Nurses Foundation
KeywordsOrthostatic intoleranceBed restOrthostatic vital signsMedicineSittingPhysical therapyCohortInternal medicineBlood pressure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

fox mt, sidani s & brooks d (2010) Journal of Nursing and Healthcare of Chronic Illness 2 , 187–196 The relationship between bed rest and sitting orthostatic intolerance in adults residing in chronic care facilities Aim. To examine the relationship between orthostatic intolerance and bed rest as it was used by/with 65 adults residing in chronic care facilities. Background. The evidence on the relationship between bed rest and orthostatic intolerance has been obtained from aerospace studies conducted in highly controlled laboratory settings, and is regarded as having high internal validity. In the studies, prolonged and continuous bed rest, administered in a horizontal or negative tilt body position, had a major effect on orthostatic intolerance in young adults. However, the applicability of the findings to the conditions of the real world of practice is questionable. Methods. Participants were recruited over the period of April 2005 to August 2006. A naturalistic cohort design was used. The cohorts represented different doses of bed rest that were naturally occurring. Comparisons were made between patients who had no bed rest (comparative dose group, n = 20), two to four days (moderate dose, n = 23) and five to seven days of bed rest (high dose, n = 22) during a one‐week monitoring period. Orthostatic intolerance was measured by orthostatic vital signs and a self‐report scale. Bed rest dose was measured by the total number of days spent in bed during one week . Results. Post hoc comparisons, using Bonferroni adjustments, indicated significant differences in adjusted means on self‐reported orthostatic intolerance between the comparative and high (CI: −4·12, −0·85; p < 0·001), and the moderate and high (CI: 0·35, 3·56, p < 0·01) bed rest dose cohorts. No group differences were found on orthostatic vital signs. Conclusions. A moderate dose of bed rest with intermittent exposure to upright posture may protect against subjective orthostatic intolerance in patients who are unable to tolerate being out of bed every day. Future research may examine the effects of reducing bed rest days on orthostatic intolerance in individuals with high doses of five to seven days of bed rest.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.584
Threshold uncertainty score0.340

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.303 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations4
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Nursing and Healthcare of Chronic IllnessSame topicCardiovascular Syncope and Autonomic DisordersFrench-language works237,207