Exploring Pulmonary Rehabilitation Programs Implemented and Conducted in Latin America for People With Chronic Respiratory Conditions: A Scoping Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background: Although pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) has demonstrated remarkable efficacy in improving exercise tolerance, physical function and alleviating perceived dyspnea in individuals with chronic respiratory conditions, there is little understanding on the delivery of PR research programs in the Latin American region. This review analyzed 1) the implementation of PR research in Latin America, 2) adherence to established ATS criteria and 3) the evaluation of PR program effectiveness in the region. Methods: The literature search was conducted in six databases (CINAHL, Medline, Embase, Scielo, Web of Science and Health and Medical Collection) up to January 2024, including studies published in English, Spanish, or Portuguese. This review was reported and summarized using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) recommendations extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR, 2022). The protocol was registered in OSF. Studies with adults from Latin America with any respiratory condition longer than three months, participating in any PR program were included. Results: Of the 1508 articles identified, 45 studies involving a total of 2067 individuals were analysed. The studies were conducted in Brazil (n=28), Colombia (n=9), Cuba (n=4), Chile (n=3) and Argentina (n=1). Most PR participants were individuals with COPD (86%). PR programs included aerobic exercise, resistance training, respiratory exercises and educational programs involving a multidisciplinary team. Quality of life, dyspnea, aerobic capacity and muscle strength were the main assessments included in the programs. Aerobic training was included in 39 studies (87%) and strength training in 32 studies (71%). Outcome measures included quality of life in 29 studies (64%), dyspnea in 40 studies (89%), aerobic capacity in 37 studies (82%) and muscle strength in 20 studies (44%). Twenty-six studies (58%) followed international recommendations for PR. Conclusion: A significant progress has been made in the implementation of pulmonary rehabilitation research programs in Latin America However, disparities remain, particularly in the exercise modalities, assessments, professional team and adherence to international guidelines.
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 | 0.024 | 0.064 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.015 | 0.018 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".