The Role of Exercise in the Quality of Life in Patients After Pancreatectomy: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Pancreatic resection is still a challenging operation characterised by high morbidity. The quality of life in patients after pancreatectomy is a critical outcome. The aim of our trial is to prove whether or not exercise has any benefit to the life of these patients. METHODS: The study was an open-label, randomized clinical trial. The patients were selected according to the Consolidated Standard of Reporting Trials criteria. The study was registered at the International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial registry (ISRCTN) with the study ID ISRCTN1087174. The study was approved by the Bioethics and Deontology Committee, Medical School of Aristotle University, Thessaloniki (ref: 166/29.10.2015). RESULTS: Once the allocation and the follow-up were completed, 21 patients in the exercise group and 22 in the control group were analyzed. There was no statistical difference between the two groups regarding co-morbidities and disease characteristics; however, the quality of life and the total status of health were superior in the exercise group. CONCLUSIONS: Exercise can improve the quality of life in patients after complex operations like pancreatectomy.
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 | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".