A novel treadmill protocol for exercise testing in children: the British Columbia Children’s Hospital protocol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Exercise testing in children is widely recommended for a number of clinical and prescriptive reasons. Many institutions continue to use the Bruce protocol for treadmill testing; however, with its incremental changes in speed and grade, it has challenges for practical application in children. We have developed a novel institutional protocol (British Columbia Children’s Hospital (BCCH)), which may have better utility in paediatric populations. Aim To determine if our institutional protocol yields similar peak responses in minute ventilation (VE), oxygen consumption (VO 2 ), carbon dioxide production (VCO 2 ), respiratory exchange ratio (RER), metabolic equivalents (METS) and heart rate (HR) when compared with the traditional Bruce protocol. Methods On two different occasions, 70 children (boys=33; girls=37) aged 10–18 years completed an exercise test on a treadmill using each of the protocols. During each test, metabolic gas exchange parameters were measured. HR was monitored continuously during exercise using an HR monitor. Results Physiological variables were similar between the two protocols (median (IQR); r s ): VE (L/min) (BCCH=96.7 (72.0–110.2); Bruce=99.2 (75.6–120.0); r s =0.95), peak VO 2 (mL/min) (BCCH=2897 (2342–3807); Bruce=2901 (2427–3654); r s =0.94) and METS (BCCH=16.2 (14.8–17.7); Bruce=16.4 (14.7–17.9); r s =0.89). RERs were similar (BCCH=1.00 (0.96–1.02); Bruce=1.03 (0.99–1.07); r s =0.48). Total exercise time (in seconds) was longer for the BCCH protocol: BCCH=915 (829–1005); Bruce=810 (750-919); r s =0.67. Conclusion The BCCH protocol produces similar peak exercise responses to the Bruce protocol and provides an alternative for clinical exercise testing in children.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".