Exercise Training in Progressive Multiple Sclerosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: There is evidence of the benefits of exercise training in multiple sclerosis (MS); however, few studies have been conducted in individuals with progressive MS and severe mobility impairment. A potential exercise rehabilitation approach is total-body recumbent stepper training (TBRST). We evaluated the safety and participant-reported experience of TBRST in people with progressive MS and compared the efficacy of TBRST with that of body weight–supported treadmill training (BWSTT) on outcomes of function, fatigue, and health-related quality of life (HRQOL). Methods: Twelve participants with progressive MS (Expanded Disability Status Scale scores, 6.0–8.0) were randomized to receive TBRST or BWSTT. Participants completed three weekly sessions (30 minutes) of exercise training for 12 weeks. Primary outcomes included safety assessed as adverse events and patient-reported exercise experience assessed as postexercise response and evaluation of exercise equipment. Secondary outcomes included the Multiple Sclerosis Functional Composite, the Modified Fatigue Impact Scale, and the Multiple Sclerosis Quality of Life–54 questionnaire scores. Assessments were conducted at baseline and after 12 weeks. Results: Safety was confirmed in both exercise groups. Participants reported enjoying both exercise modalities; however, TBRST was reviewed more favorably. Both interventions reduced fatigue and improved HRQOL (P ≤ .05); there were no changes in function. Conclusions: Both TBRST and BWSTT seem to be safe, well tolerated, and enjoyable for participants with progressive MS with severe disability. Both interventions may also be efficacious for reducing fatigue and improving HRQOL. TBRST should be further explored as an exercise rehabilitation tool for patients with progressive MS.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".