High-intensity resistance training in people with multiple sclerosis-related fatigue – experiences from a randomized controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: People with multiple sclerosis (PwMS) frequently experience fatigue. High-intensity resistance training (HIRT) seems to be effective in reducing fatigue among PwMS. OBJECTIVE: To qualitatively describe experiences and perceived outcomes of PwMS who participated in a randomized controlled trial of HIRT, and their perceptions on maintenance of training in their everyday life. METHODS: Of 68 eligible participants, 17 PwMS (4 men, 13 women) were recruited through purposive sampling. Individual semi-structured interviews were conducted via Zoom or Teams. The interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed using qualitative content analysis. RESULTS: The theme "Feeling hopeful and empowered by exercise in a socially supportive setting" illustrated participants' overall experience. The theme was supported by the three categories: "Exercise in a safe and encouraging context", "Feeling confident in living with MS-fatigue", and "Challenging to maintain exercise habits", and seven subcategories. Participating in the HIRT trial was overall described as a positive and motivating experience. It provided a safe and encouraging environment. Most participants described reduced fatigue and an increase in their engagement in everyday life. Despite the overall positive perception of HIRT, participants encountered difficulties in sustaining their exercise routines over time. CONCLUSION: Peer support from both individuals with MS and physiotherapists with MS competence were important factors to enhance engagement in the HIRT programme. The group setting provided a supportive and encouraging environment. In addition, the training seemed to be a tool to alleviate fatigue and facilitate partaking in everyday activities for most participants. However, ongoing support to maintain exercise habits in the long term may be needed.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".