An examination of the mechanisms of exercise-induced change in psychological well-being among people with spinal cord injury
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For individuals with a spinal cord injury (SCI), regular exercise training leads to significant improvements in pain, stress, and depression. The mechanisms by which exercise effects change in these variables are poorly understood. To address this issue, we examined the mediated effects of exercise on the psychological well-being of individuals with SCI according to the relationships described in the Chronic Pain Process Model. Twenty-one individuals with traumatic SCI either participated in a 9-month, twice-weekly exercise program (n = 11), or participated as nonexercising controls (n = 10). Measures of pain, stress, and depression were administered at the baseline and 3, 6, and 9 months into the intervention. Change in pain mediated exercise-induced change in stress, F(4,17) = 7.72, p < 0.01. Change in stress mediated exercise-induced change in depression, F(4,17) = 7.68, p < 0.01. With the identification of these factors as mediators of exercise-related changes in pain and well-being, exercise interventions can be designed that specifically target these mediators and possibly maximize intervention efficacy.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".