Validating a new Treadmill Protocol for Clinical Exercise Testing in Children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Exercise testing in children is widely utilized for a number of clinical and prescriptive reasons. We developed an institutional (BCCH) protocol that allows for appropriate exercise prescription. The BCCH protocol has an initial speed and grade of 2.0 mph and 1% respectively with the speed increasing by 0.5 mph every minute until the subject reaches volitional fatigue. PURPOSE: To validate our institutional protocol against the Bruce protocol. METHODS: We studied twenty-seven healthy, 10-18 year old girls and boys (age 12.8+2.2 yrs; height 159.2+17.1 cm; weight 47.3+16.1 kg; and BMI 20.8+3.0 kg/m2). On two different occasions, subjects completed an exercise test on a treadmill using each of the protocols. During each test, metabolic gas exchange parameters were measured simultaneously with open-circuit spirometry using a metabolic cart. Heart rate was monitored continuously during exercise using a heart rate monitor. Peak blood pressure was measured immediately post-exercise. CONCLUSION: Exercise testing using the BCCH and Bruce protocols yield similar results. The BCCH protocol is a good alternative to the Bruce protocol for clinical exercise testing and may be preferable for providing exercise prescription. Supported by 2014 Douglas College Research Incentive GrantTable: No title available.
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 | 0.013 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".