Exercise as a Therapeutic Tool in Age-Related Frailty and Cardiovascular Disease: Challenges and Strategies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Understanding the link between heart disease and frailty in older adults is crucial. Although medical progress has extended life, it has not fully addressed the decline in function and quality of life in frail older people. Frailty is a state of vulnerability to health stressors that needs comprehensive solutions. Its assessment within health care, especially in cardiology, is important owing to its association with worse clinical outcomes. Recent evidence and guidelines suggest that the prescription of a comprehensive exercise regimen, tailored to progressively include strength, balance, mobility, and endurance training improves adherence, functionality, and health-related quality of life, in both acute and chronic cardiovascular diseases. In addition, exercise is a vital tool that improves function, targets frailty, and holistically affects the body's systems. Still, many frail people do not exercise enough, and when they do, they usually do not follow an appropriate plan tailored for better functional outcomes. Overcoming barriers and limitations in exercise enrollment and adherence through strategies such as automated cardiac rehabilitation referral, patient education, and eHealth tools can notably improve clinical outcomes.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".