Six-minute walking versus shuttle walking: responsiveness to bronchodilation in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
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
BACKGROUND: The responsiveness of the endurance shuttle walk to functional changes following bronchodilation has recently been reported. The current literature suggests that the 6 min walking test (6MWT) is less responsive to bronchodilation than the endurance shuttle walk. AIM: To compare bronchodilator-induced changes in exercise performance with the 6MWT and the endurance shuttle walk. METHODS: In a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover trial, 14 patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV(1)) 50 (8)% predicted) completed two 6MWTs and two endurance shuttle walks, each preceded by nebulised placebo or 500 microg ipratropium bromide. Cardiorespiratory parameters were monitored during each walking test with a portable telemetric gas analyser. Quadriceps twitch force was measured by magnetic stimulation of the femoral nerve before and after each walking test. RESULTS: The 6 min walking distance did not change significantly after bronchodilation despite a significant increase in FEV(1) of 0.18 (0.09) litres (p<0.001). A similar change in FEV(1) (0.18 (0.12) litres, p<0.001) was associated with a significant improvement in the distance walked on the endurance shuttle walk (Deltadistance ipratropium bromide--placebo = 144 (219) m, p = 0.03). Quadriceps muscle fatigue was infrequent (<15% of patients) after both walking tests. CONCLUSION: The endurance shuttle walk is more responsive than the 6MWT for detecting changes in exercise performance following bronchodilation.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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