The impact of obesity on walking and cycling performance and response to pulmonary rehabilitation in COPD
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: We examined the influence of overweight and obesity on pulmonary function, exercise tolerance, quality of life and response to pulmonary rehabilitation in COPD. METHODS: 261 patients with COPD were divided into three groups: normal body mass index (BMI), overweight and obese. Baseline and post rehabilitation pulmonary function, 6-min walking test (6MWT), endurance time during a constant workrate exercise test (CET) and St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) scores were compared between all three classes of BMI. RESULTS: At baseline, obese and overweight patients had less severe airflow obstruction compared to normal BMI patients. There was no baseline difference in CET performance or SGRQ scores across BMI classes and 6MWT was reduced in the presence of obesity (p < 0.01). Compared to baseline, post-rehabilitation 6MWT, CET performance and SGRQ scores improved significantly in each group (p < 0.01), but 6MWT was still significantly lower in the presence of obesity. CONCLUSIONS: Walking, but not cycling performance was worse in obese patients. This difference was maintained post rehabilitation despite significant improvements. Weight excess may counterbalance the effect of a better preserved respiratory function in the performance of daily activities such as walking. However, obesity and overweight did not influence the magnitude of improvement after pulmonary rehabilitation.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it