MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3131386286 · doi:10.1186/s13643-021-01614-8

The impact of physical activity and exercise interventions for physical health in people with cystic fibrosis: protocol for a systematic review

2021· review· en· W3131386286 on OpenAlexafffund
Owen W. Tomlinson, Sarah Denford, Alan R. Barker, Jane E. Schneiderman, Emma S. Campisi, Helen Douglas, S. Rand, Melitta A. McNarry, Kelly A. Mackintosh, Craig A. Williams

Bibliographic record

VenueSystematic Reviews · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCystic Fibrosis Research Advances
Canadian institutionsCanada Research ChairsUniversity of TorontoHospital for Sick Children
FundersHospital for Sick ChildrenCystic Fibrosis Trust
KeywordsMedicineProtocol (science)Cystic fibrosisPsychological interventionPhysical activityPhysical therapyAlternative medicinePhysical medicine and rehabilitationGerontologyNursingPathologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Cystic fibrosis (CF) is a genetically inherited, life-limiting condition, affecting ~90,000 people globally. Physical activity (PA) and exercise form an integral component of CF management, and have been highlighted by the CF community as an area of interest for future research. Previous reviews have solely focused on PA or structured exercise regimens independent of one another, and thus a comprehensive assessment of the physical health benefits of all PA, including exercise, interventions, is subsequently warranted. Therefore, the purpose of this review is to evaluate the effects of both PA and exercise upon outcomes of physical health and healthcare utilisation in people with CF. METHODS: A systematic review has been registered and reported in line with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis-P guidelines. This will include randomised control trials on the effects of PA and exercise, relative to usual treatment, upon people with CF. Primary outcomes will include variables associated with fitness, PA, lung health, inflammation, body composition, glycaemic control and patient-reported outcomes. Secondary outcomes will include adverse events and healthcare utilisation. Searches will be undertaken in Ovid MEDLINE, OVID EMBASE, PsychINFO, ERIC, SPORTDiscus, ASSIA, CCTR, CINHAL and Web of Science databases, and will be searched from date of inception onwards. Two reviewers will independently screen citations and abstracts, and full-texts, for inclusion and data extraction, respectively. Methodological quality will be assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias-2 tool. If feasible, random-effects meta-analyses will be conducted where appropriate. Additional analyses will explore potential sources of heterogeneity, such as age, sex, and disease severity. DISCUSSION: This systematic review will build on previous research, by comprehensively assessing the impact of both PA and exercise upon physical health and healthcare utilisation in people with CF. Results of this review will be utilised to inform discussions that will ultimately result in a consensus document on the impact of physical activity and exercise for people with CF. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42020184411.

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)0.074
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.083
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.079
Threshold uncertainty score0.394

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0740.083
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0060.005
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0190.020
Bibliometrics0.0110.012
Science and technology studies0.0040.005
Scholarly communication0.0080.009
Open science0.0050.006
Research integrity0.0070.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0790.010

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 head0.104
GPT teacher head0.513
Teacher spread0.409 · 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 designSystematic review
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

Citations4
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSystematic ReviewsSame topicCystic Fibrosis Research AdvancesFrench-language works237,207