Exercise capacity of children with pediatric lung disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Pulmonary function of children with cystic fibrosis (CF) and bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD) is similar at rest even though the mechanisms of injury differ. We sought to compare the peak exercise responses in children with BPD versus CF while controlling for pulmonary impairment, nutritional status, gender, age, height, and predicted forced expired volume in 1 second (approximately 73% of predicted). METHODS: Nine BPD children and 9 CF children underwent spirometry and a progressive exercise test to maximum on a cycle ergometer. RESULTS: There was no difference between groups in body mass percentile (CF:97 +/- 13%, BPD: 98 +/- 11%), peak power output (Wpeak) (CF:67 +/- 19 W, BPD:73 +/- 28 W), % predicted Wpeak (CF:83 +/- 28%, BPD:88 +/- 15%), peak oxygen uptake (VO2peak, CF: 38 +/- 7 ml/kg/min, BPD: 39 +/-6 ml/kg/min), or % predicted VO2peak (CF:99 +/- 16 %, BPD:96 +/- 27%). CONCLUSIONS: Children with mild pulmonary impairments are able to achieve a near normal peak power output and a normal VO2peak. Neither the aetiology nor the developmental onset of the process appears to be important influences on VO2peak or Wpeak.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".