Effects of High and Moderate-Intensity Interval Training on Pulmonary and Performance Parameters in Miners Suffering From Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Diseases
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To characterize the effect of 12 weeks of high and moderate-intensity interval training on pulmonary and functional parameters in miners with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease working in the polluted environment. METHODS: Forty-five miners with COPD (average degree: 60 > FEV1 < 70), were randomly divided into HIIT (with 100%-125% ISWT); MIIT (with 60%-85% ISWT), and control. The study period was 12 weeks (3 sessions per week). At the beginning and end of the study, pulmonary and functional indices was evaluated. RESULTS: Based on results, HIIT and MIIT significantly increased FVC, FEV1, and mean traveled distance in ISWT compared with control. Comparison of training intensities showed that HIIT led to a significant change in FVC, FEV1, and ISWT record compared to MIIT. CONCLUSION: It is suggested that miners suffering from COPD, consider HIIT as part of their treatment plan.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".