Feasibility of a structured 3-minute walk test as a clinical decision tool for patients presenting to the emergency department with acute dyspnoea
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Emergency department (ED) physicians face frequent decisions on whether to admit patients with congestive heart failure (CHF) or acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). This feasibility study evaluated the potential of a structured 3-minute walk test as a clinical decision tool for admission and correlated its performance with poor clinical outcomes. It also aimed to gather evidence and directions for the design of a multicentre study to derive clinical guidelines. METHODS: In this prospective cohort study, a convenience sample was enrolled of 40 adult patients who presented to a tertiary care ED with CHF, COPD, or stable chest pain and were being considered for discharge. Patients walked at their own pace and their dyspnoea, respiratory rate, heart rate and oxygen saturation were recorded each minute for 4 minutes. The primary outcome was "poor clinical outcome" defined as admission to hospital, the need for biphasic positive airway pressure, the need for intubation, relapse, or death. RESULTS: 85.0% successfully completed the test and 30.0% had poor clinical outcomes. Of those with poor clinical outcomes, 41.7% were unable to complete the test compared with only 3.6% of those with good clinical outcomes (p<0.01). Significant differences were noted in the dyspnoea (p = 0.04) and respiratory rate (p = 0.03) as well as oxygen saturation measurements at 3 minutes. CONCLUSIONS: The 3-minute walk test is a non-resource intensive, simple procedure with applicability in most ED for discharge decisions in patients with cardiopulmonary conditions. Multicentre studies are being planned to validate these findings and establish guidelines for admission and discharge of patients with CHF or acute exacerbation of 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 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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".