Benefits and Barriers to and Desired Outcomes with Exercise in Patients with ESKD
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Patients with ESKD are sedentary. When patient-identified barriers to exercise are addressed, recruitment and retention in exercise trials remain low, suggesting that the trial design may not resonate with them. Therefore, we conducted a survey of patients on dialysis to assess perceived benefits and barriers to exercise and discover preferred outcomes and exercise type by dialysis modality and age in anticipation of designing future randomized, controlled trials. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: English- and French-speaking patients with ESKD treated with hemodialysis or peritoneal dialysis were recruited from two tertiary care hospitals in Ottawa and Montreal, Canada. Summary descriptive statistics were used to describe patient responses; then, they were separated by dialysis modality and age category. RESULTS: =0.001). The two most desired benefits of exercise were improved energy (18%) and strength (14%). The third priority differed, such that improved sleep, maintenance of independence, and longevity were selected by patients on peritoneal dialysis, patients on in-center hemodialysis, and patients on home hemodialysis, respectively. Older patients were most interested in improvements in energy, strength, and maintenance of independence, whereas younger patients were interested in improving energy, longevity, and transplant candidacy. Only 25% of patients were able to exercise without difficulty; the major barriers for the remaining patients were feeling patients were feeling too tired (55%), short of breath (50%), and too weak (49%). If patients were to exercise, they wanted to exercise at home (73%) using a combination of aerobic and resistance training (41%), regardless of modality or age category. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of patients undergoing maintenance dialysis in two tertiary hospitals in Ottawa and Montreal report similar desired outcomes and barriers, with greater differences by age category than modality.
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 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".