The 6-min Walk Test Reflects Functional Capacity in Primary Care and Obese Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The main purpose of this study was to determine the association between the 6-min walk test distance (6MWTD) and physical functional capacity (PF) in primary care patients, as well as in obese individuals. We studied 351 subjects (age=56.8±14.6 years; BMI=29.4±5.7 kg/m(2); 68% women), including 141 obese subjects (BMI≥30 kg/m(2)), recruited in 10 different family practices. Physical (PCS) and mental component summary of the health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and the 8 sub-scores were measured using the Short Form-36 Health Survey. Anthropometry, vital signs and physical testing were measured according to standardized protocols. Recreational physical activity (LPA) and sedentary levels were determined using the Canadian Community Health Survey. In a stepwise multivariate analysis, 65% of the 6MWTD variance was explained by PF of the HRQOL, age, quadriceps strength, number of chronic diseases, LPA categories, BMI, resting heart rate, PCS, height and TV-viewing categories in primary care subjects. In the obese individuals, PF, age, quadriceps strength and BMI explained 57% of the 6MWTD variance. In these 2 groups, 44% of the 6MWTD variance is explained by PF only. To conclude, the 6MWTD is strongly associated with PF of the HRQOL. Thus, it adequately reflects physical limitations in daily life activities of primary care patients, including obese individuals.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".