Evaluation of Early Submaximal Exercise Tolerance in Adolescents with Symptomatic Sport-related Concussion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: This study aimed to compare cardiorespiratory response to a graded aerobic exercise challenge between adolescents with symptomatic sport-related concussion (SSRC) and healthy control subjects. METHODS: A quasiexperimental nonrandomized study at a multidisciplinary pediatric concussion program was conducted. Thirty-four adolescents with SSRC (19 males and 15 females) and 40 healthy control subjects (13 males and 27 females) completed the Buffalo Concussion Treadmill Testing (BCTT) until either symptom exacerbation or volitional fatigue. Main outcome measures included heart rate (HR), oxygen consumption (V˙O2), carbon dioxide production (V˙CO2), and minute ventilation (V˙E) at rest and at test termination, and change from rest in variables (ΔHR, ΔV˙O2, ΔV˙CO2, and ΔV˙E) during the first five stages of the BCTT. Main outcomes were analyzed using three-way mixed-model ANOVA, with group status (control vs SSRC) and sex (male vs female) as between-subject factors, and time (BCTT stage) as the within-subject factor. RESULTS: No group differences in resting HR, systolic and diastolic blood pressure, ΔV˙O2, V˙CO2, and V˙E were observed. During the first five stages of the BCTT, no group differences in ΔV˙O2, V˙CO2, and V˙E were observed; however, SSRC patients demonstrated higher RPE (P < 0.0005) compared with control subjects. No sex-based differences were observed among SSRC patients on measures collected at rest and during early stages of BCTT. CONCLUSIONS: Although SSRC patients exhibited higher RPE during a graded aerobic exercise challenge, no differences in cardiorespiratory response were observed compared with control subjects exercising at equivalent workloads. Further work is needed to elucidate the physiological mechanisms underlying exercise intolerance after SSRC.
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 | 0.000 | 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".