Reference equations for quadriceps strength, endurance and power: a multicentre study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: The lack of reference values of lower-limb muscle function hinders the clinical recommendations of its measurement in patients with COPD. Therefore, this study aimed to develop reference equations to predict reference values for quadriceps strength, endurance and power and evaluate their construct validity in patients with COPD. Methods: Quadriceps strength, endurance and power were assessed in 158 healthy individuals and 87 patients with COPD. In addition, patients with COPD performed a 6-min walk test (6MWT) and a 1-min sit-to-stand test (1STS). Multiple linear regressions were performed to develop reference equations. The proportion of patients with COPD with reduced quadriceps function was determined, and correlations between quadriceps strength, endurance and power expressed in percentage of predicted values and 6MWT and 1STS performance were used to document the construct validity of the reference equation. Results: Except for quadriceps isometric endurance, the proposed reference equations explained 50-70% of the variance of the quadriceps properties in healthy individuals. All quadriceps properties were systematically reduced in a large proportion of patients with COPD compared to healthy individuals. Correlation coefficients between quadriceps properties expressed in percentage of predicted values and 6MWT and 1STS performance ranged between 0.28 and 0.49 (all p<0.05). Conclusion: In healthy individuals, age, sex, height and body mass index explained 50-70% of the variance of quadriceps strength, endurance and power. When expressed in percentage of predicted values, these quadriceps properties correlated with 6MWT and 1STS performance, suggesting construct validity of the reference values in patients with COPD.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".