Age‐associated effects of intradialytic exercise on physical function and nutritional status in patients receiving ambulatory hemodialysis: A multicenter cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Intradialytic exercise is essential for improving physical function for older patients. This study aimed to examine the relationship between the effects of exercise therapy and aging. METHODS: This multicenter cohort study included 1176 patients aged 40-89 years, who participated in an intradialytic exercise program, comprising stretching and resistance training, three times per week for 12 months. Isometric knee extension strength (IKES), 10-m walking speed, Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB), and Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index (GNRI) were measured at baseline and after 12 months. The patients were divided according to age as follows: 40-59, 60-69, 70-79, and 80-89 years. A linear mixed-effects model examined the improvement within-group and between-control differences, as the 40-59 age group was the control group. FINDINGS: The 40-59, 60-69, 70-79, and 80-89 age groups comprised 180, 317, 466, and 213 participants, respectively. Within-group differences, all the age groups significantly improved IKES and SPPB. The 10-m walking speed [0.02 (0.02) m/s] and GNRI [0.38 (0.33)] did not improved only in the 80-89 age group despite other age groups significantly improved. Between-control differences, IKES of the 70-79 age group [-0.24 (-0.42 to -0.06) %] was significantly lower improvement than control. GNRI of all the older groups were significantly smaller improvement than control (p < 0.05). DISCUSSION: The older group demonstrated difficulty in improving walking ability and nutritional status compared with the younger groups. Clinicians need to consider the difference in effectiveness due to age and prescribe intradialytic exercises accordingly.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".