May I Have This Dance: A Case-Series on the Acute Cardiometabolic Demand of Wheelchair Dancing in Recreational Dancers with Spinal Cord Injury
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: This case-series investigated energy expenditure, cardiovascular responses, and psychosocial outcomes during two wheelchair dancing routines with different tempos. METHODS: Three individuals with chronic, non-traumatic spinal cord injuries [males, mean age 42 (13) years, C3-T12, AIS D, schwannoma=1, poliomyelitis=1, ependymoma=1] performed slow (rumba, 80 bpm) and fast (salsa, 170 bpm) wheelchair dance routines. Physiological [heart rate, blood pressure, relative oxygen consumption (VO2), metabolic task equivalent] and psychosocial parameters [ratings of perceived exertion, enjoyment and Brunel Mood Score] were measured pre, during, and post-dancing. RESULTS: All participants showed an elevation in heart rate and relative VO2 from rest to dancing with a subsequent decrease in these parameters post-dance for both routines. Relative to the slow dance routine, two out of three participants demonstrated greater heart rate, relative VO2, ratings of perceived exertion, and enjoyment during the fast dance routine. For all three participants, metabolic task equivalents ranged from 1.7-2.4 (slow) and 2.1-3.8 (fast), suggesting the intervention was of light to moderate intensity for slow and fast dance routines, respectively. Enjoyment ratings ranged from "quite a bit" to "extremely." No differences in Brunel mood subscales were observed. CONCLUSION: This case-series offers a preliminary understanding of the acute cardiometabolic and psychosocial responses to wheelchair dance routines of differing intensities per¬formed by individuals with spinal cord injury. Responsiveness observed among these participants suggests the potential use of wheelchair dance for promoting physical activity and improving psychological well-being.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".