An 8-Week Virtual Exercise Training Program for Pediatric Solid Organ Transplant Recipients
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Musculoskeletal strength can be impaired in pediatric solid organ transplant recipients. Exercise training programs can be beneficial but in-person delivery can be challenging; virtual exercise programs can alleviate some of these challenges. This feasibility study aimed to deliver an 8-week virtual exercise program in pediatric solid organ transplant recipients. METHOD: Program delivery occurred 3 times per week for 30 minutes. An exercise stress test was completed prior to program start. The Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency strength subtest and self-report surveys were used to assess musculoskeletal strength, quality of life, fatigue, and physical activity. Contact was maintained through a text messaging platform. Z scores were calculated using standardized normative data. Medians (interquartile range) are reported for all other data. RESULTS: Eleven participants completed the program (2 liver, 5 kidney, 4 heart; 58% females; median age = 11.5 [10.3-13.8] y). Six participants attended ≥60% of classes, 5 participants attended <50% of classes. After 8 weeks, strength scores improved (Z score, Pre: -1.0 [-1.65 to -0.60] to Post: -0.2 [-1.30 to 0.40]; P = .007) with no change in other outcome measures. CONCLUSION: The virtual exercise program was delivered without technical issues and received positive participant feedback. Engagement and costs need to be considered.
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.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it