Aerobic Exercise Reduces Symptoms of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Evidence suggests aerobic exercise has anxiolytic effects; yet, the treatment potential for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and responsible anxiolytic mechanisms have received little attention. Emerging evidence indicates that attentional focus during exercise may dictate the extent of therapeutic benefit. Whether benefits are a function of attentional focus toward or away from somatic arousal during exercise remains untested. Thirty-three PTSD-affected participants completed two weeks of stationary biking aerobic exercise (six sessions). To assess the effect of attentional focus, participants were randomized into three exercise groups: group 1 (attention to somatic arousal) received prompts directing their attention to the interoceptive effects of exercise, group 2 (distraction from somatic arousal) watched a nature documentary, and group 3 exercised with no distractions or interoceptive prompts. Hierarchal linear modeling showed all groups reported reduced PTSD and anxiety sensitivity (AS; i.e., fear of arousal-related somatic sensations) during treatment. Interaction effects between group and time were found for PTSD hyperarousal and AS physical and social scores, wherein group 1, receiving interoceptive prompts, experienced significantly less symptom reduction than other groups. Most participants (89%) reported clinically significant reductions in PTSD severity after the two-week intervention. Findings suggest, regardless of attentional focus, aerobic exercise reduces PTSD symptoms.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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".