Effect of a fibromyalgia rehabilitation programme in warm versus cold climate: A randomized controlled study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To study the long-term effects on symptoms and physical function of a 4-week rehabilitation programme for patients with fibromyalgia, and to determine whether there are any differences if this programme is applied in a warm or cold climate. METHODS: A total of 132 patients with fibromyalgia were randomized to a rehabilitation programme in a warm or cold climate, or to a control group without intervention. Assessments were performed before and after intervention, and after 3 and 12 months. The main outcome measures were pain, measured by tender point count (TPC), and physical function, measured with the 6-min walk test (6MWT). RESULTS: There was no difference in any outcome variables at baseline. Persistent reduction in pain measured by TPC occurred only in the warm climatic setting. Mean difference (95% confidence interval (CI)) in TPC between warm and cold climate groups 1 year after the intervention was -1.7 (-2.9 to -0.5) and between the warm climate and the control group -2.2 (-3.3 to -1.0). Three months after the intervention the mean difference between the warm and cold climate groups in pain distribution (McGill mannequin) was -12 (-20 to -5) and between the warm climate and the control group -11 (-18 to -3). There were comparable improvements in physical function (6MWT) between the 2 intervention groups and the control group. The mean difference (95% CI) in 6MWT 1 year after the intervention between the warm climate and the control group was 33 (7-59) m. The corresponding value between the cold climate and the control group was 29 (3-55) m. Grip Strength (95% CI) was increased by 4.6 kg (2.3-6.4) in the warm climate and by 3.2 kg (0.9-5.5) in the cold climate compared with the control group 1 year after the intervention. CONCLUSION: A rehabilitation programme for fibromyalgia may have a long-term effect on pain, as measured by TPC and pain distribution, when applied in a warm climatic setting, and may improve physical function regardless of the climatic setting.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 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".