MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3092723964 · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2020-037307

Effect of 12-week pulmonary rehabilitation on cognitive function in patients with stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: study protocol for a single-center randomised controlled trial

2020· article· en· W3092723964 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Hongxia Duan, Peijun Li, Zhenwei Wang, Haixia Chen, Ting Wang, Weibing Wu, Xiaodan Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsMedicinePulmonary rehabilitationPhysical therapyCOPDCognitionExercise intoleranceBlindingRandomized controlled trialQuality of life (healthcare)RehabilitationPulmonary function testingPhysical medicine and rehabilitationInternal medicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Cognitive impairment, an important complication in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), seriously affects self-management of the disease and quality of life (QoL). As an exercise-based intervention programme, pulmonary rehabilitation (PR)-especially aerobic exercise (mainly mind-body exercise) and resistance exercise (RE)-has been proposed for its potential effectiveness in improving cognitive function. However, there is still a lack of strong evidence for PR's effectiveness. In this study, we expect to clarify the effects of pulmonary-based Qigong exercise and elastic band-based RE on cognitive function in patients with COPD and to fill in the relevant evidence blanks. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This study is a single-centre randomised controlled trial with assessor and data analyst blinding. We will recruit 108 participants with stable COPD starting on 23 December 2019, and randomly allocate them into the pulmonary-based Qigong exercise group, elastic band-based RE group, pulmonary-based Qigong exercise and elastic band-based RE combined group, or control group at a 1:1:1:1 ratio. Participants in intervention groups will perform 30 min of exercise two times per day, 5 days a week, for 12 weeks. The primary outcome will be the global cognitive function as assessed by the Montreal Cognitive Assessment and auditory event-related potential P300. Secondary outcomes will include the specific cognitive domains-attention, memory, executive function, verbal fluency and mental-processing speed; psychological functions and QoL. Exploratory outcomes will include grey matter volume and levels of inflammatory mediators. Outcomes will be measured before and after the interventions. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval has been granted by the Ethics Committee of Yue-Yang Integrative Medicine Hospital, an affiliate of Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai, China (Grant No. 2019-141). Written informed consent will be obtained from each participant before any procedures are performed. The findings will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at academic conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ChiCTR1900026869; pre-results.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.038
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.033
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.065
Threshold uncertainty score0.216

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0380.033
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0090.004
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0230.010
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0040.005
Scholarly communication0.0050.005
Open science0.0050.003
Research integrity0.0100.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0650.015

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.

Opus teacher head0.041
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.324 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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".

Quick stats

Citations12
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ Open→Same topicChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Research→French-language works237,207→