Effectiveness of exercise training in patients with COPD: the role of muscle fatigue
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The improvement in exercise performance in response to exercise training varies greatly from one patient with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease to another. It is possible that in a portion of patients the muscle stimulus applied during exercise training is insufficient to elicit training effects. We investigated whether patients presenting quadriceps contractile fatigue after training have more favourable effects of a rehabilitation programme. 46 patients followed a 3-month high-intensity exercise training programme. Exercise capacity, quadriceps force and quality of life were measured before and after the programme. Exercise training-induced quadriceps contractile fatigue was assessed after 1 month of rehabilitation with magnetic stimulation. A fall in quadriceps force of ≥15%, 15 min after training was considered as significant fatigue. 29 (63%) out of 46 patients developed significant fatigue. Patients with fatigue had a higher increase in 6-min walk distance (median (interquartile range) 57 (47-103) m versus 17 (-7-46) m; p=0.0023) and Chronic Respiratory Disease Questionnaire score (mean±sd 22±12 points versus 14±12 points; p=0.028) after the training programme compared with patients without fatigue. Improvements in quadriceps force and maximal exercise capacity were similar in both subgroups. Patients who develop quadriceps contractile fatigue during exercise training show greater training effects in terms of functional exercise capacity and health-related quality of life.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".