Pre‐transplant short physical performance battery: Response to pre‐habilitation and relationship to pre‐ and early post–lung‐transplant outcomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate whether the short physical performance battery (SPPB) pre-lung transplant (LTx) was responsive to pre-habilitation and predicted pre- and early post-transplant outcomes. METHODS: A retrospective study of LTx candidates accepted for transplant between 2016 and 2017. SPPB was categorized as frail/pre-frail (≤9/12) and non-frail (≥10/12). RESULTS: 150 patients had LTx assessment SPPB data (53% male, 61 [52-67] years, 59% had interstitial lung disease (ILD), 26% frail/pre-frail). 131 (87%) underwent transplant by December 31, 2018. Adjusting for age, sex, diagnosis and Canadian transplant listing urgency, and frailty/pre-frailty at LTx assessment was associated with a lower 6MWD pre-transplant [-89 meters 95%CI (-125 to -53), P < .0001]. 62 patients underwent six weeks of pre-habilitation. SPPB increased (11 [10-12) vs. 12 [11-12], P = .01) reflected in the chair stand component (11.4 ± 4.4 vs. 9.8 ± 2.8 seconds, P = .007), with larger improvements in the frail/pre-frail group. A frail/pre-frail SPPB closest to the time of transplant was associated with a lower 6MWD [-77 m 95%CI (-128 to -25), P = .004] but not with hospital length of stay or gait aid use three months post-transplant. CONCLUSIONS: Frailty/pre-frailty was associated with a decreased 6MWD pre- and post-transplant. The SPPB increased following pre-habilitation, which may reflect increased lower extremity strength.
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) | 0.001 | 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 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".