MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Abstract 4143923: Home-based Exercise Intervention for Children and Adolescents with Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy: A Consensus of Experts on a Safe and Acceptable Exercise Protocol

2024· article· en· W4404359464 on OpenAlexaff
Charles-Olivier Fortin-Moore, Aamir Jeewa, Alyssa Power, Michael Khoury, Kimberly Y. Lin, Jonathan B. Edelson, Geoff D.C. Ball, Joseph Atallah, Barbara Cifra, Tara Pidborochynski, Jennifer Conway

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiomyopathy and Myosin Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaSickKids FoundationStollery Children's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHypertrophic cardiomyopathyIntervention (counseling)Physical therapyProtocol (science)CardiomyopathyHeart failureCardiologyAlternative medicinePathologyNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Physical activity (PA) is a mainstay for cardiovascular health. However, those with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) are often counselled to limit PA due to the potential risk of sudden cardiac death. The emphasis placed on restriction has put this population more susceptible for acquired cardiovascular (CV) risk factors, and poor long-term CV health from physical inactivity. To date, no consensus exists about what is appropriate and safe in terms of exercise for this population. Project Aim: Use a modified Delphi method to gain consensus amongst subject matter experts on a proposed home-based exercise intervention for children 10 to 19 years of age with HCM. Methods: A panel of experts, including pediatric cardiologists, sports cardiologists, exercise physiolologists, obesity experts, and parent/patient representatives met a series of five times to develop a home-based exericse program. The proposed program was converted into a survey and sent out through the Advanced Cardiac Therapies Improving Outcomes Network (ACTION) from October 2023 to June 2024. Utilizing a modified Delphi method, each of the 11 components of the intervention were voted on regarding the degree of agreement by responders. For those who disagreed, they were prompted to provide feedback in order to modify that aspect of the exercise program. The participants were provided with feedback after each round. We aimed for 90% agreement on each component to declare consensus. Results: At total of 49 individuals completed the first round of the survey with 84% identified as a pediatric cardiologists, 75% working in a University center and two-thirds having more than five years of experience. After Round 1 consensus was reached on 3/11 and up to 8/11 after Round 2. The progression to the final home-based exercise protocol is outlined in Table 1. Conclusion: A home-based exercise program for children with HCM was developed, adapted from feedback, and the components were agreed to by experts in the field using a modified Delphi method. The next step in this process is to assess the safety and feasibility of this program in an in-hospital setting, prior to its evaluation through a multi-center, home-based exercise intervention.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.089
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.065
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.089
Threshold uncertainty score0.471

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0890.065
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.003

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.262 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculation→Same topicCardiomyopathy and Myosin Studies→French-language works237,207→