A Pilot Study of Exercise Training for Children and Adolescents With Inflammatory Bowel Disease: An Evaluation of Feasibility, Safety, Satisfaction, and Efficacy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Children with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) experience extraintestinal side effects including altered body composition, impaired muscle strength, and aerobic capacity. Exercise training may remedy these issues. PURPOSE: To assess the feasibility, safety, participant satisfaction, and efficacy of a training program for youth with IBD. METHODS: Children with IBD completed 16 weeks of training (2 supervised + 1 home sessions per week). Feasibility was assessed by tracking recruitment, adherence, and compliance rates. Safety was assessed by tracking symptoms and adverse events. Posttraining interviews gauged satisfaction. Circulating inflammatory markers, body composition, muscle strength, aerobic fitness, and habitual physical activity were measured at baseline, midtraining (8 wk), and posttraining. RESULTS: Eleven youth were recruited and 10 completed the study. Participants adhered to 28 (1) of 32 prescribed supervised sessions and 8 (4) of 16 prescribed home sessions. There were no adverse events, and overall feedback on training was positive. Posttraining, we observed an increase in lean mass (+2.4 [1.1] kg), bone density (+0.0124 [0.015] g·cm-2), aerobic fitness (+2.8 [5.7] mL·kg LM-1· min-1), and vigorous physical activity levels (+13.09 [8.95] min·h-1) but no change in inflammation or muscle strength. CONCLUSION: Supervised exercise training is feasible, safe, and effective for youth with IBD and should be encouraged.
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 | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".