Preoperative walking exercise to improve prognosis in patients with supratentorial brain tumours after craniotomy: protocol for a randomised controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Cardiopulmonary complications and cognitive impairment following craniotomy have a significantly impact on the general health of individuals with brain tumours. Observational research indicates that engaging in walking is linked to better prognosis in patient after surgery. This trial aims to explore whether walking exercise prior to craniotomy in brain tumour patients can reduce the incidence of cardiopulmonary complications and preserve patients' cognitive function. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: In this randomised controlled trial, 160 participants with supratentorial brain tumours aged 18-65 years, with a preoperative waiting time of more than 3-4 weeks and without conditions that would interfere with the trial such as cognitive impairment, will be randomly assigned in a ratio of 1:1 to either receive traditional treatment or additional combined with a period of 3-4 weeks of walking exercise of 10 000-15 000 steps per day. Wearable pedometer devices will be used to record step counts. The researchers will evaluate participants at enrolment, baseline, 14 days preoperatively, 3 days prior to surgery and 1 week after surgery or discharge (select which occurs first). The primary outcomes include the incidence of postoperative cardiopulmonary complications and changes in cognitive function (gauged by the Montreal Cognitive Assessment test). Secondary outcomes include the average length of hospital stay, postoperative pain, participant contentment, healthcare-associated costs and incidence of other postoperative surgery-related complications. We anticipate that short-term preoperative walking exercises will reduce the incidence of surgery-related complications in the short term after craniotomy, protect patients' cognitive function, aid patients' postoperative recovery and reduce the financial cost of treatment. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study protocol has been approved by Ethics Committee of Xiangya Hospital of Central South University (approval number: 202305117). The findings of the research will be shared via publications that have been reviewed by experts in the field and through presentations at conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05930288.
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 | 0.026 | 0.032 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.014 | 0.008 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.074 | 0.011 |
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".