‘Time is of the essence’: upper-body aerobic exercise to improve cardiovascular health during inpatient rehabilitation within the first year following spinal cord injury – protocol for a randomised clinical trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Individuals with spinal cord injury (SCI) face heightened cardiovascular disease (CVD) risks. While general exercise guidelines are promoted for SCI individuals, when and how to incorporate exercise during the subacute phase post-SCI remains unclear. Consequently, early aerobic exercise to reduce CVD risks is not standard practice in subacute SCI care, potentially missing an opportunity for optimal cardiovascular rehabilitation, especially given observed reductions in cardiac structure and function within the first year post-SCI. Addressing this gap could improve long-term cardiovascular health and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) for individuals with SCI. Early intervention might prevent worsening cardiovascular function and establish beneficial exercise habits. However, few studies have evaluated the effectiveness of early exercise interventions in this population. This study aims to provide insight into the impact of moderate-intensity arm-crank exercise training (ACET) on cardiometabolic, HRQOL, functional and fitness parameters in individuals with subacute (<12 months postinjury) SCI. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will conduct a single-centre, two-group, single-blind randomised controlled trial with 42 participants who have sustained a cervical or thoracic SCI within the past year. The non-intervention group will receive hospital standard of care (control group) while the intervention group will receive hospital standard of care plus moderate-intensity ACET for 10 weeks in line with the SCI-specific exercise guidelines to improve cardiometabolic health. The primary outcome measure will be central arterial stiffness (carotid-to-femoral pulse wave velocity). Secondary outcomes include assessments of (1) blood biomarkers linked to CVD, (2) cardiac structure and function, (3) extracranial vasculature, (4) HRQOL, (5) cognitive function, (6) physical activity level, (7) cardiorespiratory fitness, (8) motor function and (9) feasibility outcomes. Assessments will occur at baseline (rehabilitation centre admission, -2 weeks), preintervention (0 weeks), postintervention (10 weeks) and follow-up (6 months after postintervention), for HRQOL outcomes only. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval was obtained from the Wales Research Ethics Committee (HREC 22/WA/0329). Outcome data will be presented at international conferences, patient advocacy groups, health professional networks and community health events. Findings will be published in peer-reviewed journals and widely disseminated through strategic channels to reach researchers, healthcare providers, patients and the public. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN99941302.
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 | 0.025 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.016 | 0.007 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.050 | 0.010 |
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".