MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283378175 · doi:10.31083/j.rcm2307225

Application and Measurement Properties of the Talk Test in Cardiopulmonary Patients: A Systematic Review

2022· review· en· W4283378175 on OpenAlexaffabout
Ariany Marques Vieira, Edgar Manoel Martins, A. Althoff, Daiana Aparecida Rech, Gustavo dos Santos Ribeiro, Darlan Laurício Matte, Marlus Karsten

Bibliographic record

VenueReviews in Cardiovascular Medicine · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular and exercise physiology
Canadian institutionsCentre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et de Services Sociaux du Centre-Sud-de-l'Île-de-Montréal
FundersUniversidade do Estado de Santa CatarinaCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
KeywordsMedicinePhysical therapyReliability (semiconductor)Test (biology)Coronary artery diseaseWorkloadInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The talk test (TT) evaluates the exercise intensity by measuring speech comfort level during aerobic exercise. There are several application protocols available to assess individuals with cardiopulmonary diseases. However, the measurement properties of the TT were not systematically reviewed yet. Methods: A systematic review was developed, registered (CRD420181068930), and reported according to PRISMA Statement. Randomized clinical trials, cross-sectional studies, or series cases were identified through multiple databases and were selected if they presented concomitant speech provocation and an exercise test. Included studies were evaluated based on methodological quality (adapted New Castle-Ottawa Scale), descriptive quality (STROBE Statement), and risk of bias (COSMIN bias risk scale). Results: Ten studies were included. Seven studies presented moderate to high quality and the majority presented good scores according to the STROBE statement. Four hundred and fourteen subjects performed the TT, the majority being patients with coronary artery disease. The test validity was supported by the included studies. Talk Test reliability was considered satisfactory, although only one study presented an adequate reliability analysis. The studies found a correlation between the last positive stage of the TT with the first ventilatory threshold. Workload, oxygen uptake, and heart rate in the last positive stage of the TT were not different from the same parameters related to the first ventilatory threshold. Conclusions: The evidence indicates that the TT is suitable as an alternative tool for the assessment and prescription of exercise in individuals with cardiovascular diseases. The stage when the individual is still able to speak comfortably is suggested as the intensity for aerobic exercise prescription. As there is still no well-defined and fully explored TT protocol, caution is required when interpreting the TT results.

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)0.030
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.137
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 score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.158

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0300.137
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0100.011
Bibliometrics0.0100.010
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0030.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.204 · 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

Citations7
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReviews in Cardiovascular MedicineSame topicCardiovascular and exercise physiologyFrench-language works237,207