Correlation between Limb Muscle Endurance, Strength, and Functional Capacity in People with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To examine the correlation between limb muscle function (endurance and strength) and functional capacity in upper limbs (ULs) and lower limbs (LLs) of people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). METHOD: This article describes a secondary analysis of data from a randomized controlled trial. A stationary dynamometer was used to measure isokinetic muscle strength and endurance; the 6-minute walk test, the 6-minute pegboard and ring test, and the unsupported UL exercise test were used to measure functional capacity. RESULTS: Participants were 44 adults with COPD. Muscle strength and endurance in ULs and LLs demonstrated a moderate to strong correlation with functional capacity. When controlling for muscle strength, muscle endurance was moderately correlated with functional capacity in ULs and LLs, but when controlling for muscle endurance, there was no positive and significant correlation between muscle strength and functional capacity for the ULs or LLs. CONCLUSIONS: Functional capacity seems to be more closely related to limb muscle endurance than to limb muscle strength in people with COPD.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".