Cardiopulmonary cardiac fitness programmes: a new reality in paediatric heart disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Exercise interventions through cardiac fitness programmes improve aerobic capacity and quality of life in paediatric patients with heart disease. The aim of this study was to characterise the landscape of paediatric cardiac fitness programmes via the Global Coalition for Fitness and Congenital Heart Disease (GloCo), an international network of experts providing exercise-based interventions for children and young adults with congenital and acquired heart disease. A survey was developed and distributed electronically to GloCo members and was completed by 40/53 individuals (response rate 75%), including 23 centres in 6 countries, predominantly US based. Programmes were similar with regard to duration, session frequency, and eligible patient populations but varied with regard to mode of delivery, equipment, incentives, funding sources, and cost. At the time of completion, 14 (61%) centres had enrolled at least 1 patient, and 4 (17%) centres were developing programmes. Respondents felt that cardiac fitness programmes are effective at improving quality of life/wellness (87%), cardiovascular fitness parameters (67%), and neuromuscular strength (47%) and that the most important outcomes were quality of life/wellness, exercise testing parameters, and strength/flexibility assessments. Paediatric cardiac fitness programmes focusing on exercise interventions represent a growing international field with diverse applications. Significant variability in their structure and implementation creates barriers to developing consensus guidelines and achieving standardised care. This study underscores this variability and the need for increased collaboration across centres. Multicentre research is essential to determining the optimal design of these programmes, which in turn will allow for the development of comprehensive, evidence-based 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 | 0.009 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".