Four birds with one stone? Reparative, neuroplastic, cardiorespiratory, and metabolic benefits of aerobic exercise poststroke
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Converging evidence from animal models of stroke and clinical trials suggests that aerobic exercise has effects across multiple targets. RECENT FINDINGS: The subacute phase is characterized by a period of heightened neuroplasticity when aerobic exercise has the potential to optimize recovery. In animals, low intensity aerobic exercise shrinks lesion size and reduces cell death and inflammation, beginning 24 h poststroke. Also in animals, aerobic exercise upregulates brain-derived neurotrophic factor near the lesion and improves learning. In terms of neuroplastic effects, clinical trial results are less convincing and have only examined effects in chronic stroke. Stroke patients demonstrate cardiorespiratory fitness levels below the threshold required to carry out daily activities. This may contribute to a 'neurorehabilitation ceiling' that limits capacity to practice at a high enough frequency and intensity to promote recovery. Aerobic exercise when delivered 2-5 days per week at moderate to high intensity beginning as early as 5 days poststroke improves cardiorespiratory fitness, dyslipidemia, and glucose tolerance. SUMMARY: Based on the evidence discussed and applying principles of periodization commonly used to prepare athletes for competition, we have created a model of aerobic training in subacute stroke in which training is delivered in density blocks (duration × intensity) matched to recovery phases.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
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".