Cardiorespiratory fitness among adults with fibromyalgia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This review presents and addresses the conflicting results on cardiorespiratory fitness among adults with fibromyalgia. The heterogeneity in study designs, symptom severity and the assessment protocols might partly explain these conflicting results. It also presents the possible relationship between cardiorespiratory fitness and exercise prescription, attrition from exercise/rehabilitation programmes and independence with activities of daily living. Cardiorespiratory fitness might impact aerobic exercise and independence in daily activities of patients with fibromyalgia, which is often concomitantly diagnosed in patients with sleep disordered breathing, including patients with obstructive sleep apnoea. Therefore, cardiorespiratory fitness evaluation should be considered by general and respiratory physicians as well as physiotherapists who treat patients diagnosed with fibromyalgia for more accurate diagnosis, exercise prescription and monitoring of patients’ status. Key points Adults with fibromyalgia often present with reduced cardiorespiratory fitness. Reduced cardiorespiratory fitness might have an important impact on functional capacity and quality of life. Adults with fibromyalgia who have a secondary condition affecting their ventilatory anaerobic threshold and/orV′O2peak, for example chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, might present with a greater reduction of their cardiorespiratory fitness which may not be entirely related to their lung disease. Educational aims To better understand the cardiorespiratory fitness results among adults with fibromyalgia in general, and when taking into account differences in assessment protocol (maximalversussubmaximal testing protocol; cycle ergometerversustreadmill testing protocol) and symptom severity (fibromyalgia severity level). To better understand how cardiorespiratory fitness among adults with fibromyalgia could: 1) assist in exercise prescription; 2) minimise dropout rates from exercise/rehabilitation programmes; and 3) promote independence with activities of daily living. To learn why fibromyalgia might be important to consider in adults who have concurrent fibromyalgia and lung disease.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".