MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2101015742 · doi:10.3109/09638288.2010.541543

Tired of being inactive: a systematic literature review of physical activity, physiological exercise capacity and muscle strength in patients with chronic fatigue syndrome

2010· review· en· W2101015742 on OpenAlexaff
Jo Nijs, Senne Aelbrecht, Mira Meeus, Jessica Van Oosterwijck, Evert Zinzen, Peter Clarys

Bibliographic record

VenueDisability and Rehabilitation · 2010
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFibromyalgia and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome Research
Canadian institutionsCentre for Movement Disorders
FundersVlaamse regeringVrije Universiteit BrusselFonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek
KeywordsIsometric exercisePhysical therapyMedicineChronic fatigue syndromePhysical medicine and rehabilitationPhysical activityMuscle strengthPhysical strengthMuscle fatigueSedentary lifestyleStrength trainingElectromyography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A systematic review was undertaken to examine whether patients with chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) differ from healthy sedentary controls in physiological exercise capacity, physical activity level and muscle strength. From the available literature, it can be concluded that patients with CFS perform less physical activity during daily life, and have less peak isometric muscle strength compared to healthy sedentary control subjects. Conflicting data in relation to physiological exercise capacity of patients with CFS have been reported, but the weighted available evidence points towards a reduced physiological exercise capacity in CFS. Future studies should use a wash-out period for medication use, blinded assessments, a priori power calculation and a sedentary control group comparable for age, gender, body weight, body length and current physical activity level.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.137
Threshold uncertainty score0.981

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.298 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations77
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDisability and RehabilitationSame topicFibromyalgia and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome ResearchFrench-language works237,207