“Let's Boogie”
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Exercise is an effective treatment for individuals with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD); however, lack of adherence to exercise programs is a common barrier. Innovative approaches to exercise are needed to increase patient engagement and adherence. Dance has been shown to benefit populations with neurological conditions. The aim of our study was to investigate the feasibility of a dance intervention in individuals with COPD. METHODS: Twenty individuals with COPD participated in a 1-hr dance class delivered twice a week for 8 wk. The primary outcome measure of the study was the feasibility determined by enrollment rate, attendance rate, adverse events, and participant satisfaction. Secondary outcomes included functional capacity, balance, anxiety and depression, steps count, and health-related quality of life. RESULTS: Of the 47 individuals approached, 37 (79%) were interested in the program and 23 (49%) consented to participate and 20 completed the program with no adverse events and a mean attendance rate of 78%. The mean age ± SD of the participants was 73.4 ± 7.6 yr and 70% were females. Participant satisfaction with the program was high and significant improvements were achieved in the 6-min walk test (P = .03), Balance Evaluation Systems Test (BESTest) (P < .01), Chronic Respiratory Disease Questionnaire (P = .001), and the Activities-specific Balance Confidence scale (P = .007). CONCLUSION: Dance is an enjoyable, safe, and feasible way to exercise for those with COPD. This pilot study will inform the design of a larger randomized controlled trial to determine effectiveness of dance on exercise capacity, balance, and quality of life for people with COPD.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".