State of the Evidence Regarding the Effect of Water Exercises on Bone Outcomes in Postmenopausal Women with Osteoporotic Vertebral Fractures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Evidence-based exercise recommendations for postmenopausal women with osteoporotic vertebral fractures are lacking. Exercising in water can strengthen muscles while reducing spinal compression loading. Despite the fact that the water exercise sessions occur during a brief period of time compared to the time spent in weight-bearing activities each week, the water environment has been considered a limitation for slowing the rate of bone loss. The overall objective of this literature review is to determine the effect of aquatic exercise on bone in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis of the spine and at high risk for future osteoporotic fracture. Few randomized controlled trials have evaluated the effectiveness of aquatic exercise in postmenopausal women with established osteoporosis, and fewer still have included primary outcome measures related to fracture incidence and bone strength (density and/or geometry). The medical imaging methods available for assessing bone adaptations to exercise targeting the spine are also limited. Further research is required to determine the effect of aquatic exercise on bone and to develop exercise guidelines for this particular group at high risk for osteoporotic fracture.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".