A systematic review of yoga for state anxiety: Considerations for occupational therapy / Revue systématique sur l’efficacité du yoga pour traiter l’anxiété réactionnelle : Facteurs à considérer en ergothérapie
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: State anxiety can result from a variety of life situations. This type of anxiety can disrupt occupational engagement and performance, thereby affecting rehabilitation and recovery. Occupational therapists need to address the connection between mind-body-spirit and its relationship to performance and engagement in meaningful occupations. Yoga, when used as an adjunct to therapy, has the potential to address state anxiety. PURPOSE: The aim was to systematically review the evidence concerning the effectiveness of yoga as a treatment approach for state anxiety. METHODS: Six electronic databases, the authors' own files, and the references of included studies from 1990 to July 2011 were searched. FINDINGS: A total of 25 unique studies represented by 26 publications made up the sample: two systematic reviews; 16 randomized controlled trials, and seven prospective, controlled, non-randomized studies. Evidence suggests yoga can be a viable therapeutic option for reducing state anxiety in certain situations. IMPLICATIONS: In making the determination to recommend yoga as an intervention, occupational therapists should consider the client's circumstances and values as well as the type and intensity of the yoga program.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.018 | 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".