Effects of Short Versus Long Bouts of Aerobic Exercise in Sedentary Women With Fibromyalgia: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The purposes of this study were: (1) to assess the effectiveness of a 16-week progressive program of home-based, videotape-based, low-impact aerobic exercise on physical function and signs and symptoms of fibromyalgia in previously sedentary women aged 20 to 55 years and (2) to compare the effects of 1 long exercise bout versus 2 short exercise bouts per training day (fractionation) on physical function, signs and symptoms of fibromyalgia, and exercise adherence. SUBJECTS: One hundred forty-three sedentary women were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 groups: a group who trained using a long bout of exercise (LBE group, n=51), a group who trained using short bouts of exercise (SBE group, n=56), and a group who performed no exercise (NE group, n=36). METHODS: The SBE group exercised twice daily, and the LBE group worked out once daily. Both groups progressed in total daily training duration from 10 to 30 minutes, 3 to 5 times a week, for 16 weeks. Physical and psychological well-being, symptoms, and self-efficacy were evaluated using a multivariate analysis of variance. RESULTS: Dropout rates for the NE, SBE, and LBE groups were 14%, 38%, and 29%, respectively. The NE group differed from the LBE group in disease severity, self-efficacy, and psychological well-being (midtest, efficacy analysis) and from the SBE group in disease severity and self-efficacy (posttest, efficacy analysis). Exercise adherence was greater for the LBE group than for the SBE group between weeks 5 and 8 of the training program. No other differences between exercise groups were found. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: Progressive, home-based, low-impact aerobics improved physical function and fibromyalgia symptoms minimally in participants who completed at least two thirds of the recommended exercise. Fractionation of exercise training provided no advantage in terms of exercise adherence, improvements in fibromyalgia symptoms or physical function. High attrition rates and problems with exercise adherence were experienced in both exercise groups.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".