MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4210808010 · doi:10.1161/str.53.suppl_1.wp62

Abstract WP62: Safety Of Submaximal Aerobic Exercise Testing For People With Subacute Stroke And Comorbidity: A Scoping Review

2022· review· en· W4210808010 on OpenAlexaff
Jean Michelle Legasto-Mulvale, Alexandra Thompson, Nivetha Chandran, Elizabeth L. Inness, Sunita Mathur, Nancy M. Salbach

Bibliographic record

VenueStroke · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicStroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityToronto Rehabilitation Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineStroke (engine)ComorbidityPhysical therapyCINAHLAerobic exerciseAdverse effectRehabilitationAtrial fibrillationDiabetes mellitusPhysical medicine and rehabilitationInternal medicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Despite aerobic exercise (AE) testing being a key recommendation for stroke rehabilitation, less than half of physical therapists working with individuals post-stroke perform this practice. Concern for adverse cardiovascular events and inadequate guidance on how to conduct AE testing for individuals with stroke and comorbidity are key barriers. This review aims to describe submaximal AE testing protocols with evidence of safety, defined as less than 11% occurrence of serious adverse events, for people with subacute stroke and comorbidity. Methods: MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL and SPORTDiscus were searched from inception to October 29, 2020. Published studies that involved submaximal AE testing with individuals with subacute stroke and reported on adverse events during testing were included. Two reviewers independently conducted title and abstract, and full-text screening. One reviewer conducted data extraction, verified by a second reviewer. Results: Sixteen studies involving 595 participants were included. Hypertension (35%), cardiovascular disease (14%) and atrial fibrillation (8%) were the most common cardiovascular comorbidities, while, diabetes (25%), dyslipidemia (23%) and smoking history (11%) were the most common general comorbidities affecting participants with stroke. Evidence of safety for individuals with stroke and comorbidity was found for incremental bicycle (n=5), recumbent stepper (n=3), body weight support treadmill (n=1) and upper extremity ergometer (n=1) protocols; constant load bicycle (n=1) and body weight support treadmill (n=1) protocols; and field (n=10) protocols. Heart rate (95%), blood pressure (82%) and oxygen consumption (72%) monitoring were most frequently done. Test termination criteria based on volition/fatigue (59%) and heart rate (55%) were most commonly reported. Conclusion: A range of submaximal AE testing protocols utilizing diverse exercise modalities can be safely conducted on people with subacute stroke and comorbid conditions that are perceived to increase the risk for serious adverse events. These protocols can be used to guide the development of more specific clinical practice guidelines for conducting AE testing on individuals with stroke and comorbidity.

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)0.020
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.136
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.108

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0200.136
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.006
Bibliometrics0.0130.014
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0040.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStroke→Same topicStroke Rehabilitation and Recovery→French-language works237,207→