Exploring the effects of pulmonary rehabilitation and its determinants in lung transplant candidates with cystic fibrosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND/RATIONALE: Lung transplant (LTx) candidates with cystic fibrosis (CF) have ventilatory and musculoskeletal limitations and benefit from pulmonary rehabilitation (PR). Their training response has not been well characterized. The study aims to: 1) characterize the effect of outpatient PR and 2) evaluate the clinical characteristics associated with their PR response. METHODS: Single-center retrospective cohort study of CF LTx candidates (July 2009-June 2019) with available pre-transplant exercise data, who participated in PR 2 to 3 times/week until transplantation. Demographics, CF-related characteristics, aerobic and muscle training volumes, and six-minute walk distance (6MWD) were characterized using descriptive statistics, paired t-tests and Spearman correlations to describe relationships between CF-related characteristics and training volumes. RESULTS: In 86 CF LTx candidates (32 ± 10 years, 49 % males, FEV1: 23 ± 5 %; listing 6MWD 421 ± 89 m), the median PR time was 87 days (24-36 sessions). 78 % had at least one exacerbation and 55 % required hospitalization. 88 % used supplemental oxygen and 37 % required home non-invasive ventilation. Treadmill speed (1.7 ± 0.5 mph); biceps (50 IQR [40-70] lbs∗reps) and quadriceps (30 IQR [30-40] lbs∗reps) training volumes improved with PR (p < 0.05), whereas 6MWD remained unchanged. The presence of ≥1 respiratory exacerbation was associated with a lower progression in treadmill speed [-0.36 mph 95%CI (-0.67 to -0.04), p = 0.028]. CONCLUSION: CF LTx candidates participating in PR increased treadmill speed and muscle training volumes, with preservation of 6MWD. Respiratory exacerbations were prevalent and important determinants of aerobic training.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".