MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Exercise in the Postpartum Period

2002· review· en· W2057610622 on OpenAlexaff
Michelle F. Mottola

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Sports Medicine Reports · 2002
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGestational Diabetes Research and Management
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePostpartum periodPregnancyLactationObstetricsBreastfeedingPhysical therapyPediatrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pregnancy, birth, and the postpartum period are important events in the reproductive lives of women. Exercise guidelines exist for pregnancy, but recommendations for exercise during the postpartum period are virtually nonexistent. It is important to examine the theoretic concerns and potential benefits of exercise during this period, especially with respect to weight retention following pregnancy, lactation performance, and infant growth. It is recommended to increase the definition of the postpartum period to 1 year, because many physiologic changes due to pregnancy remain up to 1 year after delivery. Evidence-based guidelines are presented for postpartum exercise and lactation. Future research should address the impact of exercise and lactation on bone mineral density, nutrition status and weight loss, cardiovascular health, and how to optimize health promotion during the postpartum period.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.894
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.083
GPT teacher head0.394
Teacher spread0.311 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations90
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Sports Medicine ReportsSame topicGestational Diabetes Research and ManagementFrench-language works237,207