Effects of acute intradialytic exercise on cardiovascular responses in hemodialysis patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In patients with kidney failure requiring hemodialysis (HD) treatment, intradialytic exercise (IDEX) has been advocated for its feasibility and effectiveness in improving important health outcomes. However, IDEX as an adjunct therapeutic strategy is infrequently implemented, in part due to potential risks of IDEX, especially in patients with chronic volume overload. This study was performed to evaluate the safety of IDEX performed at different time points by examining its effect on intradialytic cardiovascular hemodynamics. METHODS: In a randomized cross-over study (n = 12), intradialytic changes in brachial, aortic, and cardiac hemodynamics and autonomic function were examined during a HD session; (1) without exercise; (2) with 30 min of IDEX performed in the first hour of treatment; or (3) with 30 min of IDEX in the third hour of treatment. RESULTS: IDEX during either the first or third hour did not exacerbate hemodynamic instability during treatment regardless of patient's hydrations status. While there were transient increases in stroke volume, cardiac output, and heart rate during IDEX, intradialytic changes in brachial and aortic blood pressure, cardiac hemodynamics, and autonomic function were similar on days with and without IDEX. CONCLUSION: These results indicate that IDEX does not exacerbate hemodynamic instability during HD, regardless of a patient's hydration status or the timing of exercise.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".