Effects of a Tailored Physical Activity Intervention on Cardiovascular Structure and Function in Individuals With Spinal Cord Injury
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Spinal cord injury (SCI) leads to a loss of descending motor and sympathetic control below the level of injury (LOI), which ultimately results in chronically altered cardiovascular function and remodeling. While supervised, laboratory-based exercise training can generate cardiovascular adaptations in people with SCI, it is unknown whether behavioral community-based interventions effectively generate such adaptations for individuals with SCI. Objective Examine the effects of a tailored behavioral physical activity (PA) intervention on cardiac and vascular structure and function in individuals with SCI. Methods In this randomized controlled trial, 32 participants with SCI (18-65 years, SCI >1 year) were assigned to PA (8-week behavioral intervention) or control (CON) groups. At baseline and postintervention, measures of resting left ventricular (LV) structure and function, carotid intima-media thickness and pulse-wave velocity were assessed with ultrasound and tonometry. Results Twenty-eight participants completed the study (n = 14/group). Across the full study cohort there were no significant changes in indices of LV or vascular structure and function, despite notable improvements in peak power and oxygen uptake in the PA group. However, in a subanalysis for LOI, individuals in the PA group with LOIs below T6 had evidence of altered LV geometry (ie, increased LV internal diameter, reduced sphericity index and relative wall thickness; group × time P < 0.05 for all), which was not seen in individuals with higher LOIs at or above T6. Conclusion An 8-week behavioral PA intervention appears to promote adaptations in cardiac geometry more readily in individuals with lower level SCI than those with higher-level SCI.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".