MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1994477982 · doi:10.1016/j.pmrj.2015.04.001

Feasibility of Lung Volume Recruitment in Early Neuromuscular Weakness: A Comparison Between Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis, Myotonic Dystrophy, and Postpolio Syndrome

2015· article· en· W1994477982 on OpenAlexafffund
Marta Kamińska, Franceen Browman, Daria A. Trojan, Angela Genge, Andrea Benedetti, Basil J. Petrof

Bibliographic record

VenuePM&R · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRespiratory Support and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsMontreal Neurological Institute and HospitalMultiple Sclerosis Society of CanadaMcGill UniversityMcGill University Health Centre
FundersInstitut de recherche, Centre universitaire de santé McGill
KeywordsMedicineAmyotrophic lateral sclerosisMyotonic dystrophyVital capacityPhysical therapyQuality of life (healthcare)Neuromuscular diseaseInternal medicinePhysical medicine and rehabilitationLungDiffusing capacityDiseaseLung function

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Lung volume recruitment (LVR) is a cough assistance technique used in persons with neuromuscular disorders (NMDs), most typically in those requiring noninvasive ventilation (NIV). Whether it may be useful in persons with NMDs who have milder respiratory impairment is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To assess the feasibility, impact on quality of life (QOL), and preliminary physiological effects of daily LVR in different categories of persons with NMDs who have an early stage of respiratory impairment. DESIGN: Feasibility study. SETTING: Academic tertiary care center. PARTICIPANTS: Outpatients diagnosed with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (n = 8), postpolio syndrome (n = 10), and myotonic dystrophy (n = 6) who had restrictive respiratory defects but were not yet using NIV. METHODS: Participants were asked to perform LVR up to 4 times daily and log their LVR use in a diary. Physiological measurements and questionnaires were completed at baseline and after 3 months. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Compliance with LVR use was assessed, along with QOL and willingness to continue the treatment. Physiological measurements included forced vital capacity (FVC), lung insufflation capacity (LIC), and the LIC minus FVC difference. RESULTS: Of the 24 recruited subjects, 7 with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, 7 with postpolio syndrome, and 5 with myotonic dystrophy completed the study (n = 19). At baseline, mean values for FVC and spontaneous peak cough flow were 59.9% predicted and 373.1 L/min, respectively. For subjects completing the study, 74% were willing to continue long-term LVR use, and QOL scores were not adversely affected by LVR in any NMD subgroup. The LIC-FVC difference increased from baseline to follow-up by a mean of 0.243 L (P = .006) in all subjects (n = 19), suggesting a possible improvement in respiratory system mechanics. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with NMDs who have early restrictive respiratory defects but do not yet require NIV, regular use of LVR is feasible with no negative impact on QOL over a 3-month period and may have physiological benefits. Further work is needed to determine whether early institution of LVR can improve respiratory system mechanics and help delay ventilatory failure in persons with NMDs.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.141
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.194 · 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 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

Citations23
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePM&RSame topicRespiratory Support and MechanismsFrench-language works237,207