Computational protocol: The Effect of Interdialytic Combined Resistance and Aerobic Exercise Training on Health Related Outcomes in Chronic Hemodialysis Patients: The Tunisian Randomized Controlled Study

Similar protocols

Protocol publication

[…] The SF-36 questionnaire was used to evaluate self-reported domains of health status (Ware and Sherbourne, ). This questionnaire consists of 36 items compiled into 8 scales: physical functioning (PF), role functioning/physical (RP), bodily pain (BP), general health (GH), vitality (VT), social functioning (SF), role functioning/emotional (RE), and mental health (MH). These scales range from 0 to 100; a higher score is more positive (i.e., less pain or less limitation). Normalized scores representing overall physical functioning and mental functioning are calculated from the individual scales and are presented as the physical component scale (PCS) and the mental component scale (MCS). The PCS includes the following dimensions: PF, RP, BP, GH, VT, and SF. The MCS is composed by the RE and MH items, and includes elements of the GH, VT, and SF scales (Ware, ). [...] The Statistica software version 10.0 for windows (StatSoft, Maisons-Alfort, France) was used for data analysis. Data are reported as mean and standard deviation (± SD). The distribution of each variable was examined using the Shapiro-Wilk test for normality. Data were analyzed using a mixed measures (group × period) analysis of variance (ANOVA) for repeated measures. Bonferroni tests were used as a means by which to locate significant differences. The level of significance was predetermined to be P < 0.05 for all statistical analyses. Relative changes (%) with corresponding 95% confidence interval (95% CI) were calculated for each physical performance variable. Additionally, data were assessed for clinical significance using an approach based on the magnitude of changes proposed by Hopkins et al. (). For between-group comparisons, the effect size (ES) of change with corresponding 95% confidence interval (95% CI) in each measured variable between the control and intervention groups was calculated using the pooled SD (Cohen, ). Threshold values for the interpretation of ES were 0–0.19 (trivial), 0.2–0.49 (small), 0.50–0.79 (medium), >0.79 (large). For between-group comparisons, the likelihood that the true values of the estimated difference were better/beneficial, similar, or worse/detrimental than the SWC was calculated for each variable (Hopkins et al., ). Threshold values for assigning quantitative chances of better/beneficial or poorer/detrimental effect were: <1%, almost certainly not; 1–5%, very unlikely; 5–25%, unlikely; 25–75%, possible; 75–95%, likely; 95–99%, very likely; and >99%, almost certain. The true difference was assessed as unclear when the chance of having better/beneficial or poorer/detrimental value was both >10% (Hopkins et al., ). […]

Pipeline specifications

Software tools Rp-Bp, Statistica
Applications Miscellaneous, Ribo-seq analysis
Organisms Homo sapiens
Chemicals Cholesterol, Triglycerides