Changes in 6‐minute walking distance in lung transplant candidates while participating in a home‐based pre‐habilitation program—A retrospective chart review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Home-based exercise programs may offer a less costly alternative to providing exercise pre-transplant to a large number of patients. We describe the changes in 6-minute walk distance (6MWD) in lung transplant candidates who participated in a home-based exercise program and their relationship to post-transplant outcomes. Retrospectively, we investigated 159 individuals while awaiting transplantation who performed the surgery between 2011 and 2015. Primary outcome was 6MWD at time of assessment for transplant, last test prior to transplant and one-month post-transplant. 6MWD decreased by 28 ± 93.9 m between the time of assessment and the last 6MWD prior to transplantation (P < .001). Forty-one patients (25.8%) increased their 6MWD (mean + 85.8 ± 42.8 m); 72 patients (45.3%) decreased their 6MWD (mean -109.8 ± 71.2 m); and 46 patients (28.9%) had no change in 6MWD (-1.5 ± 15.7 m). There was a moderate correlation (r = .528; P < .001) between the last 6MWD prior to transplant and 6MWD post-transplant. Change in 6MWD prior to transplant weakly correlated with length of time on mechanical ventilation (r = -.185; P = .034). When adjusted for covariates, change in 6MWD prior to transplant was not associated with length of time on mechanical ventilation, total hospital LOS, or intensive care unit LOS. The majority of the patients were able to either increase or maintain their 6MWD while participating in a home-based pre-habilitation program during the waiting list period. Prospective research is needed to evaluate the effects of home-based pre-habilitation program for lung candidates.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".