Physiology of Walking in Patients with Moderate to Severe Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Little is known about the physiology of walking in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Our objective was to evaluate the cardiac and respiratory responses as well as the electrical activity of lower limb muscles during walking in patients with COPD compared with healthy controls. METHODS: Cardiorespiratory parameters were monitored during a 6-min walking test (6 MWT) in 10 patients with COPD and 11 healthy controls. Surface EMG (sEMG) data were recorded in five muscle groups (soleus, medial gastrocnemius, tibialis anterior, vastus lateralis, and rectus femoris) of the right leg during walking. The integrated signal (iEMG) and the median frequency were obtained from the sEMG signal of each muscle group. RESULTS: Although the walking distance and speed were significantly reduced in patients with COPD compared with those in controls, patients walked at a higher percentage of peak VO2. The overall sEMG patterns were similar between patients with COPD and controls. A fall in the sEMG median frequency during the 6 MWT was observed for the vastus lateralis and the rectus femoris in patients with COPD and in controls suggesting a muscle fatiguing contracting profile. CONCLUSION: The 6 MWT was performed at a relatively higher intensity in patients with COPD compared with healthy controls. The progressive fall in the sEMG median frequency of the vastus lateralis and rectus femoris in both groups suggested the occurrence of a muscle fatiguing profile during walking. The performance of a daily activity such as walking imposes a high physiological demand in patients with COPD.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".