Benefits of Short-term Modified Stepping Exercise on Blood Pressure and Physical Performance in Female Elderly with Hypertension: a Pilot Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aimed to investigate the effects of continuous bench stepping on a 20-cm bench box in female elderly with hypertension. The participants were recruited in a rural area in ChumPhae District, Khon Kaen, Thailand. Twenty (20) participants who passed the eligibility criteria were randomly assigned to the control (CG) and experimental (EG) groups. The EG performed modified stepping exercises (continuously stepping up and down within 60 min/session with 3 sessions/wk for 4 wk at moderate intensity), while the CG received lifestyle modification without specific training. The primary outcome was blood pressure level [systolic (SBP) and diastolic (DBP)]. The secondary outcomes consisted of exercise tolerance, balance ability, and lower leg muscle strength, which were assessed by a 6-min walk test (6MWT), timed up and go test (TUGT), and five-time sit to stand test (FTSTS), respectively. After 4 wk of training, there were significant interactions between group and time in terms of SBP, DBP, 6MWT, and FTSTS (all p < 0.01 except for 6MWT with p < 0.05). Nonetheless, the paired t-test indicated that the EG showed significant improvement in all outcomes from baseline (all p < 0.01 except for 6MWT with p < 0.05). In contrast, the CG showed non-significant improvement in all outcomes. In conclusion, the short-term modified stepping exercise might be appropriate for blood pressure control in adjuvant with antihypertensive medications, and it can also improve physical performance in female elderly with hypertension.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".