Aerobic Exercise During Early Rehabilitation for Cervical Spinal Cord Injury
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: People with spinal cord injuries (SCIs), particularly those with injuries causing tetraplegia, are at risk for cardiovascular illnesses. There is a compelling need to address poor cardiovascular health as early as possible after cervical SCI. The purpose of this case report is to illustrate the process of aerobic exercise prescription during inpatient rehabilitation for cervical SCI. CASE DESCRIPTION: The patient was a 22-year-old man who had sustained a complete C5 SCI during a swimming accident 12 weeks before he participated in an aerobic exercise program. The program was developed to facilitate aerobic capacity while minimizing muscular fatigue. The patient attended 18 sessions over a 2-month period. OUTCOMES: The patient's exercise tolerance increased in terms of both exercise duration and exercise intensity. Measurements of cardiovascular health, taken before and after training, revealed substantial increases in peak oxygen uptake (20%) and orthostatic tolerance over the course of the program. DISCUSSION: The patient experienced typical complications associated with acute SCI (eg, orthostatic hypotension, urinary tract infections). He exhibited several signs of improved exercise tolerance and wheelchair mobility during the 2-month program, indicating potential cardiovascular and functional improvements from the exercise training.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".