Cardiopulmonary exercise capacity and quality of life of patients with heart failure undergoing a functional training program: study protocol for a randomized clinical trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Exercise intolerance is a common finding in heart failure that generates a vicious cycle in which the individual starts to limit his activities even more due to progressive fatigue. Regular physical exercise can increase the cardiopulmonary exercise capacity of these individuals. A new approach to physical exercise, known as functional training, could improve the oxygen consumption and quality of life of patients with heart failure; however, there is no information about the effect of this modality of exercise in this patient population. This randomized trial will compare the effects of 36 sessions of functional training versus strength training in heart failure patients. METHODS: This randomized parallel-design examiner-blinded clinical trial includes individuals of both sexes aged ≥40 years receiving regular follow-up at a single academic hospital. Subjects will be randomly allocated to an intervention group (for 12-week functional training) or an active comparator group (for 12-week strength training). The primary outcomes will be the difference from baseline to the 3-month time point in peak oxygen consumption on cardiopulmonary exercise testing and quality of life assessed by the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire. Secondary outcome measures will include functionality assessed by the Duke Activity Status Index and gait speed test; peripheral and inspiratory muscular strength, assessed by hand grip and manovacuometry testing, respectively; endothelial function by brachial artery flow-mediated dilation; lean body mass by arm muscle circumference; and participant adherence to the exercise programs classified as a percentage of the prescribed exercise dose. DISCUSSION: The functional training program aims to improve the functional capacity of the individual using exercises that relate to his specific physical activity transferring gains effectively to one's daily life. In this context, we believe that that functional training can increase the cardiopulmonary exercise capacity and quality of life of patients with heart failure. The trial has been recruiting patients since October 2017. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03321682. Registered on October 26, 2017.
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 | 0.037 | 0.033 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.014 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.069 | 0.012 |
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".