MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

One-Legged Cycle Training for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease. A Pragmatic Study of Implementation to Pulmonary Rehabilitation

2015· article· en· W1924690789 on OpenAlexaff
Rachael A Evans, Thomas E. Dolmage, Suzanna Mangovski-Alzamora, Julia Romano, Lauren O’Brien, Dina Brooks, Roger Goldstein

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of the American Thoracic Society · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoWest Park Healthcare Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPulmonary rehabilitationMedicinePhysical therapyInterquartile rangeCOPDRehabilitationCyclingAerobic exerciseInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

RATIONALE: In patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), partitioned exercise training using one-legged cycling leads to greater improvements in peak oxygen uptake than conventional two-legged cycling. OBJECTIVES: We evaluated the feasibility of incorporating one-legged cycling as the principal aerobic training modality for pulmonary rehabilitation in COPD. METHODS: Physiotherapists underwent four teaching sessions about the principles and practical implementation of one-legged cycling training. Patients enrolled in a pulmonary rehabilitation program underwent 6-8 weeks of training in which one-legged cycling three times per week was the principal aerobic exercise activity. Participants cycled for 15 minutes with each leg, in each session. An incremental cardiopulmonary exercise test was completed before and after pulmonary rehabilitation along with standard pulmonary rehabilitation outcome measures. Participants and physiotherapists completed a satisfaction survey at the end of the program. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: A total of 22 out of 32 participants (14 male; mean [SD] age, 66 [7] years; FEV1% predicted, 32 [17]%; median [interquartile range] Medical Research Council dyspnea scale, 3.5 [3.0-4.3]) completed pulmonary rehabilitation. Peak oxygen uptake increased 1.1 (0.4-1.7) ml·min(-1)·kg(-1) (8%) from baseline (P<0.01). The mean (95% confidence interval) 6-minute-walk test distance improved by 72 (45-98) m (P=0.001). The change in the Chronic Respiratory Questionnaire total score of 1.6 (1.1-2.1; P<0.001) was achieved by improvement in all four domains above the clinically important difference. All the physiotherapists considered one-legged cycling safe and would continue to prescribe it; 75% of participants would recommend it to other patients. CONCLUSIONS: One-legged cycling was successfully implemented into a "real-life" pulmonary rehabilitation program, demonstrating improvements in cardiorespiratory fitness with associated improvement in function for patients with moderate/severe COPD. One-legged cycling should be recommended in professional pulmonary rehabilitation guidelines as an option for exercise training and be available in other pulmonary rehabilitation programs. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01930526).

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)0.021
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.039
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: Non-randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.112

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0210.039
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0040.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.116
GPT teacher head0.447
Teacher spread0.332 · 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

Citations46
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of the American Thoracic SocietySame topicChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) ResearchFrench-language works237,207