Trajectories of endurance activity following pulmonary rehabilitation in COPD patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Maintenance of physical activity following pulmonary rehabilitation remains a challenge for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The objectives of this study were to identify patterns of endurance activity after completion of pulmonary rehabilitation and to characterise people who succeed and those who have difficulty maintaining endurance activity. In a longitudinal study embedded within a randomised clinical trial, 206 individuals with COPD underwent a 3-month pulmonary rehabilitation programme. Weekly duration of endurance activity was assessed at 4, 6, 8 and 12 months after the start of rehabilitation. Trajectory modelling was used to determine the most common patterns of activity during the post-rehabilitation phase from 4-12 months. Three distinct patterns were identified, two of which indicated difficulty in maintaining endurance activity: 61 individuals reported a high activity level at 4 months (2.7 h·week(-1)) and stayed high; 114 individuals started at a low activity level (mean 1.0 h·week(-1)) and stayed low; and 31 individuals started high (3.0 h·week(-1)) and declined. The low activity group was characterised by more severe disease and greater respiratory impairment. The high and declined group had less severe disease and respiratory impairment, but reported greater barriers to exercise. Pulmonary rehabilitation should include interventions aimed at minimising barriers, in order to induce long-term behaviour change.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".