Effect of Physical Activity after Recent Deep Venous Thrombosis: A Cohort Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To determine whether increased physical activity 1 month after deep vein thrombosis (DVT) led to worsening of venous symptoms and signs within the subsequent 3 months. METHODS: By a multicenter prospective cohort study of patients with acute DVT, we used validated questionnaires at baseline, 1 month, and 4 months post-DVT for each exposure, using the Godin Questionnaire to measure physical activity, the VEINES-QOL to measure disease severity, and the postthrombotic syndrome (PTS) scale to measure symptoms and signs usually attributed to sequelae of DVT. RESULTS: Of 301 patients followed for 4 months, 25% were inactive and 25% were only mildly active before their DVT. In univariate analysis, physical activity at 1 month was not associated with a change in PTS score between 1 month and 4 months (P=0.42). After adjusting for the potential confounders of age, sex, pre-DVT physical activity, and disease severity at 1 month, the results suggested that higher physical activity levels at 1 month may be protective against worsening of the PTS score over the subsequent 3 months. Compared with those who were inactive at 1 month, the adjusted OR was 0.93 (95%CI: 0.47, 1.87) for mildly to moderately active persons, and 0.52 (95%CI: 0.24, 1.15) for highly active persons. Among patients who were active pre-DVT (N=220), 55.5% had returned to their previous levels of physical activity or greater within 4 months. CONCLUSIONS: For most persons, exercise at 1 month post-DVT does not appear to worsen venous symptoms and signs over the subsequent 3 months, and more than 50% resume their usual level of activity within 4 months.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".