The Use of Activity Trackers with Exercise Prescription in Children with Congenital Heart Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Inadequate physical activity has been reported in children with congenital heart disease (CHD). Activity trackers used in conjunction with individualized exercise prescription may help to increase physical activity in these patients. We sought to determine the effect of activity trackers with exercise prescription on moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) and fitness in children with CHD. METHODS: We approached 54 patients with CHD aged 10-18 yrs. Fifteen were not interested in participating and 15 were excluded based on their baseline fitness (VO2 >90% predicted). Exercise physiologists assessed physical activity using the FITT principle. Participants were randomized to an intervention group (INT) or control group (CON). INT children were given an exercise prescription and activity tracker (MOVband, Cleveland, OH) for 16 weeks. CON children were given general advice about exercise. Exercise physiologists monitored the INT group’s physical activity online and provided support on a bi-weekly basis. Baseline and follow-up (16-week) assessments included cardiopulmonary exercise tests and 7-day waist-worn accelerometry (GT3X+ ActiGraph LLC; 1s epoch). Mean daily MVPA was estimated from vertical acceleration counts (>2296 cpm) for those with valid data (≥2 days with ≥600 minutes wear time/day). Fitness was assessed as VO2peak (ml/kg/min) and endurance time (sec) during a standardized treadmill exercise test. Between-group differences were assessed via a repeated-measures ANOVA (p<0.05). RESULTS: Seventeen children completed the study protocol (CON n=9; INT n=8). There was an interaction effect (time*group) for daily MVPA (F=4.74; p=0.05), with the INT group increasing their MVPA (46 to 54 min) and CON declining (40 to 32 min). Treadmill time increased significantly in the INT group (+56 sec) but not in the CON group (-11 sec; F=7.18; p=0.02). There was no effect for VO2peak. CONCLUSIONS: The use of activity tracker with exercise prescription is feasible and associated with increases in MVPA in children with CHD.
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 | 0.003 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".