MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Symptoms That Limit Exercise Capacity in Patients With Obstructive Lung Disease

2025· article· en· W4410275763 on OpenAlexaff
Waseem Hassan, Elena Kum, Paul M. O’Byrne, Imran Satia, K. J. Killian

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Research
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineObstructive lung diseasePulmonary diseasePhysical therapyLungIntensive care medicineInternal medicineCardiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Rationale: Obstructive lung disease can substantially impact quality of life, exercise capacity, and daily functioning. Breath effort alone is commonly assumed as the main limiting factor in the day-to-day activities of these individuals. The purpose of this study was to determine what symptoms limited exercise capacity during incremental cardio-pulmonary exercise testing (CPET) in individuals who had airflow obstruction with an impairment in ventilatory capacity. Methods: A cross-sectional, retrospective study of all patients >18 years of age with airflow obstruction (FEV1/FVC <70%) who performed CPET conducted at the McMaster University Medical Center between 1988-2012. Maximum power output (MPO) ranged from 0 to 2200 kpm/min. We analyzed data on those with a MPO between the 5th to 95th percentiles (200-1200 kpm/mim) to avoid potential outliers. At the end of the CPET, we queried patients on whether breath effort, leg effort, or a combination of both led to stopping the test. Results: 4429 patients had evidence of airflow obstruction (mean±SD age 61.3±14.8, FEV1 1.9±0.8, FVC 3.1±1.0). The main limiting symptom as MPO increased included leg effort alone (n=2025, 45.7%), followed by a combination of leg effort and breath effort (n=1497, 33.8%). Breath effort alone limited a smaller proportion of patients (n=1007, 22.7%). Figure 1 presents the results stratified by patients with an FEV1 % predicted of >80, 60-80, 40-60 and <40%. When FEV1% predicted was >80%, the limiting symptom was mainly leg effort (n=531, 48%), followed by both symptoms (n=428, 39%), and breath effort alone (n=138, 12%). As FEV1 % predicted worsened, limitation due to leg effort decreased while limitation due to breath effort increased. In those with FEV1% predicted <40%, leg effort, breath effort, and a combination of the two similarly limited individuals. Patients with lower FEV1 % predicted had weaker quadricep strength. Conclusion: In individuals with obstructive spirometry regardless of clinical diagnosis, leg effort predominantly limited exercise capacity. The effort required to breath was comparable to leg effort only in the lowest FEV1 category. This data highlights the importance of muscle strength, conditioning, and leg fatigue when assessing and evaluating patients with obstructive airways disease. The role of muscle strengthening exercise should be emphasised in rehabilitation.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.280 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine→Same topicChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Research→French-language works237,207→