An eight-week yoga intervention is associated with improvements in pain, psychological functioning and mindfulness, and changes in cortisol levels in women with fibromyalgia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Fibromyalgia (FM) is a chronic condition characterized by widespread musculoskeletal pain, fatigue, depression, and hypocortisolism. To date, published studies have not investigated the effects of yoga on cortisol in FM. This pilot study used a time series design to evaluate pain, psychological variables, mindfulness, and cortisol in women with FM before and after a yoga intervention. METHODS: Participants (n = 22) were recruited from the community to participate in a 75 minute yoga class twice weekly for 8 weeks. Questionnaires concerning pain (intensity, unpleasantness, quality, sum of local areas of pain, catastrophizing, acceptance, disability), anxiety, depression, and mindfulness were administered pre-, mid- and post-intervention. Salivary cortisol samples were collected three times a day for each of two days, pre- and post-intervention. RESULTS: Repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) revealed that mean ± standard deviation (SD) scores improved significantly (p < 0.05) from pre- to post-intervention for continuous pain (pre: 5.18 ± 1.72; post: 4.44 ± 2.03), pain catastrophizing (pre: 25.33 ± 14.77; post: 20.40 ± 17.01), pain acceptance (pre: 60.47 ± 23.43; post: 65.50 ± 22.93), and mindfulness (pre: 120.21 ± 21.80; post: 130.63 ± 20.82). Intention-to-treat analysis showed that median AUC for post-intervention cortisol (263.69) was significantly higher (p < 0.05) than median AUC for pre-intervention levels (189.46). Mediation analysis revealed that mid-intervention mindfulness scores significantly (p < 0.05) mediated the relationship between pre- and post-intervention pain catastrophizing scores. DISCUSSION: The results suggest that a yoga intervention may reduce pain and catastrophizing, increase acceptance and mindfulness, and alter total cortisol levels in women with FM. The changes in mindfulness and cortisol levels may provide preliminary evidence for mechanisms of a yoga program for women with FM. Future studies should use an RCT design with a larger sample size.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.003 | 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".