MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3207216867 · doi:10.2196/28124

Smartphone-Assisted High-Intensity Interval Training in Inflammatory Rheumatic Disease Patients: Randomized Controlled Trial

2021· article· en· W3207216867 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Håvard Haglo, Eivind Wang, Ole Kristian Berg, Jan Hoff, Jan Helgerud

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR mhealth and uhealth · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRheumatoid Arthritis Research and Therapies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHigh-intensity interval trainingMedicineRandomized controlled trialPhysical therapyInterval trainingInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases (IRDs) experience disease-related barriers to physical training. Compared with the general population, IRD patients are reported to have reduced maximal oxygen uptake (VO2max) and physical activity levels. Supervised high-intensity interval training (HIIT) is documented to counteract the reduced VO2max and poor cardiovascular health associated with IRDs. However, supervised HIIT is resource demanding. Objective This study sought to investigate if self-administered 4×4-min HIIT guided by a smartphone app (Myworkout GO) could yield similar HIIT-induced effects as standard 4×4-min HIIT performed under the guidance and supervision of health care professionals. The effects studied were on VO2max and health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Methods Forty patients (33 female patients, mean age 48 years, SD 12 years; 7 male patients, mean age 52 years, SD 11 years) diagnosed with rheumatoid arthritis, spondyloarthritis, or systemic lupus erythematosus were randomized to a supervised group (SG) or an app group (AG). Both groups were instructed to perform 4×4-min intervals with a rate of perceived exertion of 16 to 17, corresponding to 85% to 95% of the maximal heart rate, twice a week for 10 weeks. Treadmill VO2max and HRQoL measured using RAND-36 were assessed before and after the exercise period. Results VO2max increased (P<.001) in both groups after 10 weeks of HIIT, with improvements of 3.6 (SD 1.3) mL/kg/min in the SG and 3.7 (SD 1.5) mL/kg/min in the AG. This was accompanied by increases in oxygen pulse in both groups (P<.001), with no between-group differences apparent for either measure. Improvements in the HRQoL dimensions of bodily pain, vitality, and social functioning were observed for both groups (P<.001 to P=.04). Again, no between-group differences were detected. Conclusions High-intensity 4×4-min interval training increased VO2max and HRQoL, contributing to patients’ reduced cardiovascular disease risk, improved health and performance, and enhanced quality of life. Similar improvements were observed following HIIT when IRD patients were guided using perceived exertion by health care professionals or the training was self-administered and guided by the app Myworkout GO. Utilization of the app may help reduce the cost of HIIT as a treatment strategy in this patient population. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04649528; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04649528

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.302 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations33
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR mhealth and uhealthSame topicRheumatoid Arthritis Research and TherapiesFrench-language works237,207