Association between muscle strength and the cardiopulmonary status of individuals living with HIV/AIDS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare aerobic function [anaerobic threshold (%VO(2)-AT), respiratory compensation point (%VO(2)-RCP) and peak oxygen uptake (VO(2)peak)] between physically active patients with HIV/AIDS and matched controls and to examine associations between disease status, poor muscle strength, depression (as estimated by the profile of mood states questionnaire) and the aerobic performance of patients. METHODS: Progressive treadmill test data for %VO(2)-AT (V-slope method), RCP and (VO(2)peak) were compared between 39 male patients with HIV/AIDS (age 40.6 ± 1.4 years) and 28 male controls (age 44.4 ± 2.1 years) drawn from the same community and matched for habitual physical activity. Within-patient data were also examined in relation to CD4+ counts (nadir and current data) and peak isokinetic knee torque. RESULTS: AT, RCP and (VO(2)peak) values were generally similar for patients and controls.Within the patient sample, binary classification suggested that AT, RCP and (VO(2)peak) values were not associated with either the nadir or current CD4+ count, but treadmill test variables were positively associated with peak isokinetic knee torque. CONCLUSION: The aerobic performance of physically active patients with HIV/AIDS is generally well conserved. Nevertheless, poor muscle strength is observed in some HIV/AIDS patients, which is associated with lower anaerobic power and (VO(2)peak), suggesting the possibility of enhancing the aerobic performance of patients with weak muscles through appropriate muscle-strengthening activities.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".