182: Associations Between Physical Activity, Exercise Capacity, and Gross Motor Skill Development are Independent of the Type of Congenital Heart Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Some children with congenital heart disease (CHD) have exercise intolerance; however, the associations between their moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) levels, gross motor skill development, and peak exercise capacity are unclear. To determine whether associations between MVPA, peak exercise capacity, and gross motor skill development are influenced by patient characteristics and type of CHD. Medical history was abstracted from medical record review. Accelerometers assessed 7-day MVPA levels. A standard cardiopulmonary exercise test using the modified Bruce protocol determined peak exercise oxygen consumption (%-predicted VO2). Gross motor skill scores (combined motor and object score) were determined using The Test of Gross Motor Development Version-2 (TGMD-2). CHD patients (n=172, 56% male, age 8±2 years) included children with a repaired atrial septal defect (ASD, n=37, MVPA=424±271 minutes/week), transposition of the great arteries (arterial switch, TGA, n=47, MVPA=416±164 minutes/week), tetralogy of Fallot (TOF, n=48, MVPA=327±141 minutes/week), and single ventricle after Fontan (SV; n=40, MVPA=301±134 minutes/week). MVPA was significantly higher for ASD/TGA versus TOF/SV (P<0.001). A higher %-predicted VO2 was associated with higher MVPA (parameter estimate [standard error]: +1.2(0.6) %-predicted VO2 per 60 minutes of MVPA, r=0.21, P=0.02). A higher gross motor skill score was associated with higher MVPA (EST: +2.1(0.7) minutes per 1% change in TGMD score, r=0.24, P=0.004). This association was marginally influenced by testing during the summer months (EST[SE]: −0.05[−0.02], P=0.01) and family-reported income (EST[SE]: −0.001[−0.0002], P=0.02). However, associations were independent of age at testing, age at repair, sex, CHD diagnosis, and on-going cardiac complications. Associations between MVPA, gross motor skill, and peak exercise capacity were similar for all children with CHD. Lower MVPA levels in TOF and SV patients were not associated with clinical variables. Future research should target interventions for increasing the MVPA of TOF and SV patients.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".