Longitudinal study of physical activity with various methods in maintenance hemodialysis patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The purpose was to make longitudinal measurements of physical activity and study whether physical activity decreases over time in maintenance hemodialysis (MHD) patients. METHODS: This was an observational study, where MHD patients were considered in a 12-month follow-up. Laboratory variables and physical activity were tested three times over 12-months in 124 hemodialysis patients. Physical activity was measured using the Human Activity Profile (HAP), the Stanford 7-day Physical Activity Recall Questionnaire (PAR), and walking speed. Repeated measure variance analysis was used to analyze changes of physical activity. The Bonferroni method was used to do pairwise comparisons. FINDINGS: The proportion of decreased physical activity increased (P < 0.05). The maximal activity score (MAS), adjusted activity score (AAS), HAP dimension scores, and walking speed all decreased at the three time points studied (P < 0.001). At the same time, moderate physical activities and PAR values changed at three time points (P < 0.05). Pairwise comparisons showed that between the baseline and the 6-month follow-up, MAS, AAS, the scores of personal/household work, entertainment/social, independent exercise, leg effort, and back effort, all decreased(P < 0.05). Between the baseline and the 12-month follow-up, and between the 6-month follow-up and the 12-month follow-up, all the scores of HAP and walking speed decreased significantly (P < 0.001). Between the baseline and the 6-month follow-up, moderate physical activities and PAR values increased (P < 0.05). However, between the baseline and the 12-month follow-up, and between the 6-month follow-up and the 12-month follow-up, moderate physical activities and PAR did not change statistically. CONCLUSION: Physical activity decreased in hemodialysis patients in the 12-month follow-up.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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 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".