Six‐month and one‐year followup of 23 weeks of aerobic exercise for individuals with fibromyalgia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To measure mood and physical function of individuals with fibromyalgia, 6 and 12 months following 23 weeks of supervised aerobic exercise. METHODS: This is a followup report of individuals who were previously enrolled in 23 weeks of land-based and water-based aerobic exercise classes. Outcomes included the 6-minute walk test, Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), State-Trait Anxiety Inventory, Arthritis Self-Efficacy Scale (ASES), Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire (FIQ), tender point count, patient global assessment score, and exercise compliance. Outcomes were measured at the start and end of the exercise classes and 6 and 12 months later. RESULTS: Analyses were conducted on 29 (intent-to-treat) or 18 (efficacy) subjects. Six-minute walk distances and BDI total scores were improved at followup (all analyses). BDI cognitive/affective scores were improved at the end of 23 weeks of exercise (both analyses) and at the 12-month followup (efficacy analysis only). BDI somatic scores were improved at 6-month (both analyses) and 12-month followup (intent-to-treat only). FIQ and ASES function were improved at all followup points. ASES pain was improved in efficacy analyses only (all followup points). Tender points were unchanged after 23 weeks of exercise and at followup. Exercise duration at followup (total minutes of aerobic plus anaerobic exercise in the preceding week) was related to gains in physical function (6- and 12-month followup) and mood (6-month followup). CONCLUSION: Exercise can improve physical function, mood, symptom severity, and aspects of self efficacy for at least 12 months. Exercising at followup was related to improvements in physical function and perhaps mood.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".