Reference values for the Unsupported Upper Limb Exercise test in healthy adults in Brazil
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To establish reference values for the Unsupported Upper Limb EXercise (UULEX) test, which measures peak arm exercise capacity, in healthy adults in Brazil. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study, involving presumably healthy individuals ≥ 30 years of age who completed questionnaires and underwent spirometry. All of the individuals underwent two UULEX tests 30-min apart. The outcome measure was the maximum time (in min) to completion of the test. RESULTS: We included 100 individuals between 30 and 80 years of age. The mean test completion time was 11.99 ± 1.90 min among the women and 12.89 ± 2.15 min among the men (p = 0.03). The test completion time showed statistically significant correlations with age (r = -0.48; p < 0.001), gender (r = 0.28; p = 0.004), body mass index (BMI, r = -0.20; p = 0.05), and height (r = 0.28; p = 0.005). Linear regression analysis showed that the predictors of UULEX completion time were age (p = 0.000), BMI (p = 0.003), and gender (p = 0.019), which collectively explained 30% of the total variability. The mean UULEX completion time was 6% lower for the women than for the men. CONCLUSIONS: The present study was able to establish reference values for the UULEX test in healthy adults in Brazil. The values were influenced by age, gender, and BMI.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 it