MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Differences in characteristics, health status and fulfillment of exercise recommendations between axial spondyloarthritis patients with and without supervised group exercise

2022· article· en· W4281612113 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Bas Hilberdink, M. Carbo, Davy Paap, Suzanne Arends, T. P. M. Vliet Vlieland, Florus van der Giesen, Anneke Spoorenberg, Salima van Weely

Bibliographic record

VenueSeminars in Arthritis and Rheumatism · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpondyloarthritis Studies and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersArthritis SocietyReumaNederlandDutch Arthritis Society
KeywordsMedicinePhysical therapyAerobic exerciseDiseaseInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Since decades, supervised group exercise (SGE) is recommended for people with axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA). This study examines if weekly SGE contributes to fulfillment of exercise recommendations in axSpA patients. METHODS: Cross-sectional data from three studies with axSpA patients in The Netherlands, including two with outpatient populations (n = 196 and n = 153) and one with SGE participants (n = 128), were analysed. Sociodemographic and disease characteristics, SGE participation, health status (ASAS Health Index), spinal mobility and fulfillment of the recommendations for leisure-time aerobic (≥150 min/week moderate-intensity or ≥75 min/week vigorous-intensity) and strength and mobility (≥2 sessions/week) exercise (measured with SQUASH-questionnaire) were assessed. Differences between patients with and without SGE were analysed. RESULTS: In the two outpatient populations (n = 349), 17 patients (5%) used SGE. The SGE participants (n = 145) were significantly older, had longer disease duration, were less frequently employed, used less medication and had worse spinal mobility than patients without SGE (n = 332). There were no significant differences in health status. Patients with SGE fulfilled the moderate-intensity aerobic (89 % vs. 69%) and strength and mobility (44 % vs. 29%) exercise recommendations more often than patients without SGE, but the aerobic exercise recommendation was less often fulfilled with vigorous-intensity exercise (5 % vs. 12%). CONCLUSION: SGE is used by just few, especially older, axSpA patients and contributes to fulfilling recommendations for moderate-intensity, mobility and strength exercise. Both in patients with and without SGE, only a minority fulfilled the recommendations for vigorous-intensity, strength and mobility exercises. Therefore, future promotion of exercise should focus on implementing these types of exercise.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSeminars in Arthritis and RheumatismSame topicSpondyloarthritis Studies and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207