Whole body resistance training on functional outcomes of patients with Stage 4 or 5 chronic kidney disease: A systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chronic kidney disease (CKD) causes skeletal muscle wasting, resulting in reduced function and inability to live independently. This systematic review critically appraised the scientific literature regarding the effects of full-body resistance training on clinically-relevant functional capacity measures in CKD. The study population included studies of people with Stage 4 or 5 CKD and a mean age of 40+ years old. Eight databases were searched for eligible studies: Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane, CINAHL, Scopus, Web of Science, MEDLINE, and AGELINE. MeSH terms and keyword combinations were used for screening following the PRISMA conduct. Inclusion criteria were based on PICO principles and no date of publication filter was applied. The intervention was training 2 days/week of structured resistance exercises using major upper and lower muscle groups. Minimum intervention period was 7 weeks. Comparison groups maintained their habitual activity without structured exercise training. Outcome measures of interest were: 6-min walk test, grip strength, timed up-and-go test, and sit-to-stand. Eight randomized controlled trials and one nonequivalent comparison-group study fulfilled the inclusion criteria and underwent data extraction. All studies were of hemodialysis patients. The evidence indicates that full-body resistance exercise significantly improved grip strength, timed up and go and sit to stand tests; metrics associated with enhanced quality and quantity of life.
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 | 0.004 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".