Time-courses of lung function and respiratory muscle pressure generating capacity after spinal cord injury: A prospective cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the time-courses of lung function and respiratory muscle pressure generating capacity after spinal cord injury. DESIGN: Multi-centre, prospective cohort study. SUBJECTS: One hundred and nine subjects with recent, motor complete spinal cord injury. METHODS: Lung function and respiratory muscle pressure generating capacity were measured at first mobilization, at discharge from inpatient rehabilitation and one year after discharge. Lung function was measured in all 109 subjects, and 55 of these performed additional measurements of respiratory muscle pressure generating capacity. Trajectories of respiratory muscle function for different lesion level groups were assessed by multi-variate multi-level regression models. RESULTS: Forced vital capacity, forced expiratory volume in 1 sec and maximal inspiratory muscle pressure generating capacity significantly increased during and after inpatient rehabilitation. Forced inspiratory volume in 1 sec, peak inspiratory flow, peak expiratory flow and maximal expiratory muscle pressure generating capacity increased only during inpatient rehabilitation, but not thereafter. Increasing lesion level had a negative effect on all measured lung function parameters, as well as on maximal inspiratory and expiratory muscle pressure generating capacity. CONCLUSION: Respiratory function improved during inpatient rehabilitation, but only forced vital capacity, forced expiratory volume in 1 sec and maximal inspiratory muscle pressure generating capacity further improved thereafter. In particular, expiratory muscle function and subjects with tetraplegia should be screened and trained regularly.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".