Minimal clinically important difference for time spent in moderate to vigorous physical activities in COPD after pulmonary rehabilitation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Enhancing physical activity (PA) is crucial for COPD management. This study estimated the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for time spent in moderate to vigorous physical activities per day (MPVA/day) after pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) in people with COPD. This was a secondary analysis of a clinical trial ( NCT04223362 ) and included people with COPD who completed a 12-week community-based PR programme. PA outcomes were collected pre- and post- PR, for 7 days, using ActiGraph GT3X+ (minimum 8h/day for 4 days). The MCID established for steps/day in COPD, set at 600 steps/day, was used as an anchor. Mean change, ROC curves and linear regression were used as anchor-based methods; 0.5*standard deviation, standard error of measurement (SEM), 1.96*SEM and minimal detectable change were used as distribution-based methods. The MCID was pooled by weighting 2/3 to anchor- and 1/3 to distribution-based methods. 51 people with COPD were included (86% male, 71±8 years, 57±17 FEV1%pred). A significant, positive, and moderate correlation (ρ=0.5, P<0.001) was present between changes in steps/day and MVPA/day. The pooled MCID for MVPA/day was 10.5 minutes (Figure 1). An increase of 11 min/day in MVPA post-PR indicates clinically relevant improvements in PA for people with COPD. The established MCID may aid health professionals and policy makers in evaluating PA interventions. erj;64/suppl_68/OA3689/F1 F1 F1
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 | 0.023 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".