Validity and Reliability of the 6-Minute Walk Test in a Cardiac Rehabilitation Population
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Although the 6-minute walk test is commonly used to assess the functional status of patients with severe cardiopulmonary disease, few studies have tested its value in a cardiac rehabilitation (CR) population with milder disease status. The purpose of this study was to examine the validity and reliability of the 6-minute walk in a Phase II/III CR program. METHODS: Ninety-four patients (61 men, 33 women) aged 63 +/- 10 years completed three 6-minute walks on nonconsecutive days. Patients also completed the Duke Activity Status Index (DASI) and the Short Form 36 Health Survey (SF-36). In addition, maximum metabolic equivalents (METs) from a symptom-limited graded exercise test were obtained from files. RESULTS: The 6-minute walk was linearly related to maximum METs (r = 0.687, P < 0.001), supporting the validity of the test. Patients walked significantly farther in each 6-minute walk (F = 19.83, P < 0.001), and strong test-retest reliability was demonstrated (intraclass correlation = 0.97). Distance walked decreased with older age (F = 19.49, P < 0.001), with men walking farther than women (F = 7.19, P < 0.01). The 6-minute walk was moderately correlated with scores from the DASI (r = 0.502, P < 0.001), and the Physical Function subscale of the SF-36 (r = 0.624, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The 6-minute walk is a valid and reliable method of assessing functional ability in a Phase II/III CR population. A learning effect of 6% was observed over the three walks; however, it is unknown if this learning effect will be retained over time. This test may be particularly valuable to smaller CR centers that want to document functional improvements but do not have access to conventional treadmill tests.
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.
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 | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 it