MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2756957362 · doi:10.1002/ppul.23896

The oxygen uptake efficiency slope is not a valid surrogate of aerobic fitness in cystic fibrosis

2017· article· en· W2756957362 on OpenAlexaff
Craig A. Williams, Owen W. Tomlinson, Lucy V. Chubbock, Daniel Stevens, Zoe L. Saynor, P.J. Oades, Alan R. Barker

Bibliographic record

VenuePediatric Pulmonology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCystic Fibrosis Research Advances
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersCystic Fibrosis TrustRoyal Devon and Exeter NHS Foundation Trust
KeywordsMedicineVO2 maxAerobic exerciseCystic fibrosisInternal medicinePhysical therapyCardiologyAnalysis of varianceRepeated measures designPhysical fitnessHeart rateBlood pressureStatisticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Maximal cardiopulmonary exercise testing is recommended on an annual basis for children with cystic fibrosis (CF), due to clinically useful prognostic information provided by maximal oxygen uptake (V̇O 2max ). However, not all patients are able, or willing, to reach V̇O 2max , and therefore submaximal alternatives are required. This study explored the validity of the oxygen uptake efficiency slope (OUES) as a submaximal measure of V̇O 2max in children and adolescents with CF. Methods Data were collated from 72 cardiopulmonary exercise tests (36 CF, 36 controls), with OUES determined relative to maximal and submaximal parameters of exercise intensity, time, and individual metabolic thresholds. Pearson's correlation coefficients, independent t ‐tests, and factorial ANOVAs were used to determine validity. Results Significant ( P < 0.05) correlations with V̇O 2max were observed for most expressions of OUES, but were consistently weaker in CF ( r = 0.30‐0.47) when compared to CON ( r = 0.58‐0.89). Mean differences for all OUES parameters between groups were not significant ( P > 0.05). When split by V̇O 2max tertiles, minimal significant differences were found between, and within, groups for OUES, indicating poor discrimination of V̇O 2max . Conclusions The OUES is not a valid (sub) maximal measure of V̇O 2max in children and adolescents with mild‐to‐moderate CF. Clinicians should continue to use maximal markers (ie, V̇O 2max ) of exercise capacity.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.137
Threshold uncertainty score0.682

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.295 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePediatric PulmonologySame topicCystic Fibrosis Research AdvancesFrench-language works237,207