MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3210733415 · doi:10.1093/pch/pxab061.111

141 Sickle cell disease and physical activity: Is it safe?

2021· article· en· W3210733415 on OpenAlexaff
Melissa-Zoraya Corvalan Cifuentes, Yves Pastore, Thanh-Diem Nguyen, Denis Bérubé, Nagib Dahdah

Bibliographic record

VenuePaediatrics & Child Health · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIron Metabolism and Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalCentre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et de Services Sociaux du Centre-Sud-de-l'Île-de-MontréalCentre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et de Services Sociaux du Saguenay–Lac-Saint-JeanCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-Justine
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicinePhysical therapyDiseasePhysical activityEveningPediatrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Primary Subject area Hematology and Oncology - Paediatric Background Though physical activity (PA) is beneficial for healthy individuals and for those with chronic disease, its impact on sickle cell disease (SCD) children remains poorly studied. Moreover, patients may refrain from PA given a perceived fear of SCD complications. Objectives 1) Evaluate whether SCD children engage differently in PA compared to their peers. 2) Evaluate the cardiopulmonary impact of PA in a group of SCD patients. Design/Methods Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, SCD patients aged 8-17 years old consented to answer a PA questionnaire (PAQ) and have their school peers answer the same PAQ. PAQ, a well-described surrogate marker of PA, is a standardized questionnaire evaluating PA during the last 7 days. Patients and their peers were approached only during the school year. A set of HbSS patients were invited to participate in a supervised exercise test including pre- and post-effort PFT, echocardiography, EKG, measurement of troponins and NT-proBNP and a methacholine challenge to evaluate exercise-induced bronchial hyperreactivity. T-test was used as statistical analysis, using SPSS V24. The study received IRB approval. Results Questionnaires from 25 SCD children (13 SS and 12 SC) were compared with 36 matched-school peers. SCD patients were overall less active (p=0.04). While their level of activity was similar at school, SCD patients were overall less active after school (p=0.028), in the evening (p=0.008) and weekends (p=0.049). While the difference was significant for both SS and SC patients, SS were less active than SC, although this difference was statistically not significant. Five HbSS patients on HU were subjected to an exercise test. There were no statistical differences in the pre- and post-PA evaluations including measurements of troponin, NT-proBNP and functional testing. None of them had exercise-induced hyperreactivity. Conclusion Overall, SCD patients are less active than their peers, mostly outside of school. The absence of cardiopulmonary modifications during PA is reassuring, although our study was limited to 5 HbSS patients on HU. Whether HU has a protective role cannot be excluded. Our results encourage us to further evaluate PA interventions outside of school in SCD patients. Interventional studies evaluating the risk-benefit ratio of PA in SCD children are further needed.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.053

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.274 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePaediatrics & Child Health→Same topicIron Metabolism and Disorders→French-language works237,207→