MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4248263709 · doi:10.1177/2047487318786176

Young investigator award session III- Exercise Basic & Translational Research (EBTR)

2018· article· en· W4248263709 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Preventive Cardiology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetics and Physical Performance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersFonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek
KeywordsMedicineSession (web analytics)Translational researchPhysical therapyGerontologyPathologyWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Traditional cardiac rehabilitation programs may not satisfy the needs or interests of women with heart disease. Aerobic interval training (AIT) has been shown to produce similar and even greater improvements in physical and mental health when compared to moderate-intensity continuous exercise (MICE) in patients with heart disease. Little is known regarding the impact of AIT in women with heart disease. Purpose: Using a matched case-control design, the purpose of this study was to examine the impact of AIT in comparison to MICE on physical and mental health in women with heart disease. We hypothesized that AIT delivered to women with heart disease within a cardiac rehabilitation program would produce similar or greater improvements in physical and mental health outcomes when compared to MICE. Methods: Women attended (1) AIT (45 mins: 10-min warm-up, 30 mins of alternating high [4 mins at 85-95% HRpeak] and low [3 mins at 60-70% HRpeak] intervals, 10-min cool-down) 2x/week for 10 weeks, the first two of the 10 weeks served as a familiarization period for AIT, or (2) MICE (60 mins: 10-min warm-up, 35 mins of aerobic conditioning, 15-min cool-down) 2x/week for 8 weeks. Height, body mass, waist circumference, resting blood pressure and heart rate and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale were assessed and graded exercise tests were conducted (AIT only). Descriptive statistics were used to report the measures and their variations, and general linear model procedures for repeated measures were used to examine differences between the AIT and MICE groups. Results: Fifty women with heart disease (AIT, n=25; MICE, n=25) (meanAESD: 58AE9 years; body mass index: 28.3AE6.3 kg/m2; waist circumference: 93.7AE13.6 cm; resting blood pressure: 122AE18/73AE9 mmHg [normotensive due to medical management]; resting HR: 70AE14 bpm) participated. The AIT group exercised, on average, at 86% and 69% of age predicted HRpeak during the high and low intensity intervals, respectively, and attended 18 of 20 (90%) exercise sessions. The MICE group exercised, on average, at 74% of age predicted HRpeak, and attended 15 of 16 (94%) exercise sessions. Significant improvements in waist circumference (AIT: -5.1AE7.7 cm; MICE: -2.4AE5.1 cm), resting diastolic blood pressure (AIT: -3.5AE7.0 mmHg; MICE: -5.4AE8.9 mmHg), anxiety (AIT: -2.0AE3.5 points; MICE: -1.6AE3.2 points), depression (AIT: -0.6AE3.2 points; MICE: -1.4AE2.2 points) and VO2peak (AIT: +2.1AE2.6 mL/kg/min) from baseline to follow-up were observed (ps<0.05). No significantly different changes in physical or mental health outcomes were observed between the AIT and MICE groups (ps>0.05). Conclusions: AIT and MICE led to statistical and clinical improvements in physical and mental health outcomes for women with heart disease. The shorter AIT program requiring 15 minutes less each session may be considered an advantage to women with heart disease who often cite time restrictions as a barrier to cardiac rehabilitation.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.774
Threshold uncertainty score0.461

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.041
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.280 · 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