Effects of a Low-Intensity Walking Intervention on Walking Performance Measures in Patients with Peripheral Artery Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of a low-intensity (pain-free) walking intervention on walking performance and self-report measures in patients with peripheral arterial disease (PAD). Thirty-three participants who experienced intermittent claudication were assigned to either a walking group (n = 18) or a comparison group (n = 15). The walking group performed a structured walking program (pain-free walking, 5 days per week for 12 weeks). The comparison group maintained their usual daily activities. Tests of walking performance included a treadmill test (pain-free, functional and maximal walking distances were measured) and the 6-minute walk test. Self-perception of walking ability was determined using the walking impairment questionnaire. Circulatory measures were obtained from the ankle-brachial index, (ABI). Participants were assessed at the beginning (Week 1) and end of the study (Week 12). Members of the walking group significantly increased their walking performance and self-perception of walking ability, whereas the ABI remained the same. These results show that participation in a 12-week, low-intensity (pain-free) exercise program can enhance physical performance, perception of walking ability and maintain the ABI suggesting that a home-based exercise program is a viable alternative to traditional exercise programs prescribed for patients with symptomatic PAD. Keywords: peripheral artery disease, exercise, walking performance, ankle-brachial index, walking impairment questionnaire
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".