The 6-min walk test: responses in healthy Canadians aged 45 to 85 years
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We sought to describe responses to the 6-min walk test (6MWT) in healthy Canadian adults in order to facilitate interpretation of its results in patient populations. Seventy-seven healthy Canadians aged 45 to 85 years (65 ± 11 years, 40 females) completed this study. During a single visit, three 6MWTs were undertaken. The main outcome measure was 6-min walk distance (6MWD). Age, gender, height, and weight were recorded. In 61 (79%) participants, cardiorespiratory variables were collected during the third 6MWT using a calibrated portable gas analysis system. The 6MWD increased between the first and second test (615 ± 96 to 639 ± 98 m; p < 0.001) with no further improvement on the third test (638 ± 99 m; p = 0.945). The best 6MWD from the first 2 tests was 640 ± 99 m (range 416 to 880 m). A greater 6MWD was achieved by males compared with females (672 ± 94 vs. 611 ± 93 m; p = 0.005). The following equation accounted for 49% of the variance in 6MWD: 6MWD = 970.7 + (-5.5 × age) + (56.3 × gender), where females = 0, males = 1. The 6MWT elicited large cardiorespiratory responses with minimal symptoms. The rate of oxygen uptake measured at test-end was associated with the 6MWD (r = 0.802; p < 0.001). These data allow the 6MWD achieved in Canadian adults to be expressed as a percentage of the predicted value and provide researchers and clinicians with values for the expected cardiorespiratory responses in a healthy adult population for the purpose of comparison with patient populations.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".