MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Effect of a randomized, controlled trial of exercise on mood and physical function in individuals with fibromyalgia

2001· article· en· W1994522409 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueArthritis & Rheumatism · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFibromyalgia and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoToronto General HospitalUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFibromyalgiaMoodPhysical therapyBeck Depression InventoryAnxietyMedicineRandomized controlled trialPhysical exerciseProfile of mood statesPsychologyPsychiatryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of exercise on mood and physical function in individuals with fibromyalgia. METHODS: Subjects were randomly assigned to an exercise (EX) or control (CTL) group. EX subjects participated in 3 30-minute exercise classes per week for 23 weeks. Subjects were tested at entry and at 6, 12, and 23 weeks. Tests included the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), 6-minute walk, State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI), Mental Health Inventory (MHI), Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire (FIQ), Arthritis Self-Efficacy Scale (ASES), and a measure of tender points and knee strength. RESULTS: Fifty subjects (27 EX, 23 CTL) completed the study, and 31 (15 EX, 16 CTL) met criteria for efficacy analyses. In efficacy analyses, significant improvements were seen for EX subjects in 6-minute walk distances, BDI (total, cognitive/ affective), STAI, FIQ, ASES, and MHI (3 of 5 subscales) scores. These effects were reduced but remained during intent-to-treat analyses. CONCLUSION: Exercise can improve the mood and physical function of individuals with fibromyalgia.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.563

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.254 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it