Physical activity, fitness, and dyspnea perception in children with congenital diaphragmatic hernia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We assessed whether physical activity could influence the performance and perception of dyspnea in children who were operated on for high risk congenital diaphragmatic hernia (CDH). We hypothesized that CDH children with normal activity would have better lung function and exercise performance level when compared to sedentary CDH subjects. We studied 18 children (11 males and 7 females, mean age 6.6 ± 2.6 years) who were surgically corrected. All children underwent physical examination, ECG at rest, and a maximal exercise stress test on a treadmill to measure the duration of exercise, maximal heart rate and blood pressure, maximal oxygen uptake (VO(2) max and VO(2) ml/kg/min). Lung function testing to measure forced vital capacity (FVC), forced expiratory volume in 1 sec (FEV(1) ), and peak expiratory flow (PEF) was also performed. Following the stress test, the Dalhousie dyspnea and effort scale was shown to children as a pictorial panel with three groups of increasing (from 1 to 7) levels of effort perception, throat discomfort, and chest dyspnea. Children were divided into group A (sedentary) and group B (regular physical participation). There was no difference in CDH severity between the two groups. Group A had a statistically significant lower duration of exercise (P < 0.01), maximal oxygen consumption (VO(2) max P < 0.0001), VO(2) ml/kg/min (P < 0.001), higher throat closing feeling (P < 0.004), chest dyspnea (P < 0.001), and effort perception (P < 0.04) compared to group B. No differences were found in lung function tests. In conclusion, our data may suggest that children with a history of CDH who are active maintain a higher level of performance with less perception of dyspnea and effort.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".