Bone Status in Activity-Restricted Pregnant Women Assessed Using Calcaneal Quantitative Ultrasound
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Pregnancy-induced bone loss may be further exacerbated by activity restriction (AR). The authors compared the bone status of AR hospitalized (≥7 days) pregnant women in the third trimester to ambulatory (AM) women at the same gestational age, using a prospective cross-sectional design. METHOD: AR was quantified in AR women by daily step counts using a pedometer for 7 consecutive days. Bone status was evaluated in the left and right calcaneus bones of both AR (n = 13) and AM (n = 20) women using quantitative ultrasound (QUS). RESULTS: AR women took an average of 1,504 ± 1,377 steps/day. Speed of sound scores (1,543.05 ± 41.97 m/s vs. 1,569.60 ± 46.12 m/s) and broadband ultrasound attenuation (BUA) scores (107.93 ± 9.59 dB/MHz vs. 114.69 ± 17.06 dB/MHz) were not different between the AR and AM groups, respectively (p > .05). However, bone stiffness index (SI) scores (84.0 ± 16.2 vs. 95.8 ± 22.1, respectively, p < .05) were different between groups, indicating a greater relative risk of future fracture in the AR women. CONCLUSION: Increased fracture risk appears to be a negative side effect incurred through an average of 16 days of hospitalized AR in late pregnancy. Further investigations using a larger sample size are necessary to evaluate the effect of antepartum AR on bone status in the postpartum period to determine if bone status is further attenuated by breastfeeding or if recovery occurs with resumption of ambulation and return of menses and to assess future risk in these women as they age. Prenatal care providers should be made aware of these risks.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".