The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Randomized clinical trial of prehabilitation in colorectal surgery
Open accessAbstract
Background: ‘Prehabilitation’ is an intervention to enhance functional capacity in anticipation of a forthcoming physiological stressor. In patients scheduled for colorectal surgery, the extent to which a structured prehabilitation regimen of stationary cycling and strengthening optimized recovery of functional walking capacity after surgery was compared with a simpler regimen of walking and breathing exercises. Methods: Some 112 patients (mean(s.d.) age 60(16) years) were randomized to either the structured bike and strengthening regimen (bike/strengthening group, 58 patients) or the simpler walking and breathing regimen (walk/breathing group, 54 patients). Randomization was done at the surgical planning visit; the mean time to surgery available for prehabilitation was 52 days; follow-up was for approximately 10 weeks after surgery. Results: There were no differences between the groups in mean functional walking capacity over the prehabilitation period or at postoperative follow-up. The proportion showing an improvement in walking capacity was greater in the walk/breathing group than in the bike/strengthening group at the end of the prehabilitation period (47 versus 22 per cent respectively; P = 0·051) and after surgery (41 versus 11 per cent; P = 0·019). Conclusion: There was an unexpected benefit from the recommendation to increase walking and breathing, as designed for the control group. Adherence to recommendations was low. An examination of prehabilitation ‘responders’ would add valuable information. Registration number: NCT00227526 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale
Zigmond, A. S., & Snaith, R. P. (1983) · Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica · doi:10.1111/j.1600-0447.1983.tb09716.x · Cited by 47,139
ATS Statement: Guidelines for the Six-Minute Walk Test
(2002) · American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine · doi:10.1164/ajrccm.166.1.at1102 · Cited by 11,195
The validity of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale
Bjelland, I., Dahl, A. A., Haug, T. T., & Neckelmann, D. (2002) · Journal of Psychosomatic Research · doi:10.1016/s0022-3999(01)00296-3 · Cited by 9,779
Statistical Analysis with Missing Data
Little, R. J. A., & Rubin, D. B. (2002) · Wiley Series in Probability and Statistics · doi:10.1002/9781119013563 · Cited by 8,473
Allison, P. (2002) · doi:10.4135/9781412985079 · Cited by 2,050
Cited by
Gustafsson, U. O., Scott, M. J., Hubner, M., Nygren, J., Demartines, N., Francis, N., Rockall, T. A., Young‐Fadok, T. M., Hill, A. G., Soop, M., et al. (2019) · World Journal of Surgery · doi:10.1007/s00268-018-4844-y · Cited by 2,119
Self-citationGillis, C., Li, C., Lee, L., Awasthi, R., Augustin, B., Gamsa, A., Liberman, A. S., Stein, B., Charlebois, P., Feldman, L. S., et al. (2014) · Anesthesiology · doi:10.1097/aln.0000000000000393 · Cited by 876
Low, D. E., Allum, W., De Manzoni, G., Ferri, L., Immanuel, A., Kuppusamy, M., Law, S., Lindblad, M., Maynard, N., Neal, J., et al. (2019) · World Journal of Surgery · doi:10.1007/s00268-018-4786-4 · Cited by 641
Carli, F., Bousquet-Dion, G., Awasthi, R., Elsherbini, N., Liberman, S., Boutros, M., Stein, B., Charlebois, P., Ghitulescu, G., Morin, N., et al. (2020) · JAMA Surgery · doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2019.5474 · Cited by 537
Self-citationPrehabilitation Before Major Abdominal Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta‐analysis
Hughes, M. J., Hackney, R. J., Lamb, P. J., Wigmore, S. J., Christopher Deans, D. A., & Skipworth, R. J. E. (2019) · World Journal of Surgery · doi:10.1007/s00268-019-04950-y · Cited by 393
Metadata
- Authors
- Carli, F., Charlebois, P., Stein, B., Feldman, L., Zavorsky, G., Kim, D. J., Scott, S., & Mayo, N. E.
- Venue
- British Journal of Surgery
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2010-05-25
- Volume
- 97
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 1187-1197
- ISSN
- 0007-1323 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-2168
- OpenAlex
- W2134588880
- Cited by
- 522
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 13.97
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.