The effects of exercise during pregnancy on the newborn’s brain: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: It is generally accepted that an active lifestyle is beneficial for cognition in children, adults and the elderly. Recently, studies using the rat animal model found that the pups of mothers who exercised during pregnancy had increased hippocampal neurogenesis and better memory and learning abilities. The aim of this report is to present the experimental protocol of a study that is designed to verify if an active lifestyle during pregnancy in humans has an impact on the newborn's brain. METHODS: 60 pregnant women will be included in a randomized controlled study. The experimental group will be asked to exercise a minimum of 20 minutes three times per week, at a minimal intensity of 55% of their maximal aerobic capacity. The control group will not be exercising. The effect of exercise during pregnancy on the newborn's brain will be investigated 8 to 12 days postpartum by means of the mismatch negativity, a neurophysiological brain potential that is associated to auditory sensory memory. We hypothesize that children born to mothers who exercised during their pregnancy will present shorter latencies and larger mismatch negativity amplitudes, indicating more efficient auditory memory processes. DISCUSSION: As of September 2011, 17 women have joined the study. Preliminary results show that the experimental group are active 3.1 ± 0.9 days per week while the control group only exercise 0.8 ± 0.6 days per week. The results of this study will present insight on fetal neuroplasticity and will be a valuable tool for health professionals who wish to encourage pregnant women to exercise. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov registration: NTC01220778.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".