Dance for Adults With Fibromyalgia—What Do We Know About It? Protocol for a Scoping Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Fibromyalgia is a chronic disorder characterized by widespread muscular tenderness, pain, fatigue, and cognitive difficulties. Nonpharmacological treatment options, such as physical activity, are important for people with fibromyalgia. There are strong recommendations to support engagement in physical activity for symptom management among adults with fibromyalgia. Dance is a mode of physical activity that may allow individuals with fibromyalgia to improve their physical function, health, and well-being. Dance has the potential to promote improved pain processing while simultaneously providing the health and social benefits of engaging in physical activity that contributes to symptom management. However, we are unaware of current evidence on dance as a nonpharmacological/physical activity intervention for adults with fibromyalgia. OBJECTIVE: The aims of the study are to provide an overview of the extant evidence to understand how dance is used for individuals with fibromyalgia; to examine the extent, range, and nature of research activity in the area; and to determine the value of undertaking a full systematic review. METHODS: Scoping reviews are useful to comprehensively and systematically map the literature and identify key evidence, or research gaps. The search strategy will involve electronic databases including Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, PsycInfo, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Literature in the Health Sciences in Latin America and the Caribbean (LILACS), Allied and Complementary Medicine (AMED), International Bibliography of Theatre and Dance, Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro), Trip, Proquest Theses/Dissertations, Web of Science, World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and ClinicalTrials.gov. The study will be mapped in seven stages: (1) identifying the research questions, (2) identifying relevant studies, (3) selecting the studies, (4) charting the data, (5) collating, summarizing and reporting the results, (6) consulting, and (7) disseminating the knowledge. RESULTS: The search, title, and abstract are now completed; full text screening was carried out and authors are awaiting interlibrary loans and translations. Data extraction will start shortly after full text 'screening' is completed. Completion is expected in Fall 2017. CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge this will be the first attempt to systematically identify knowledge of dance as a potential intervention for adults with fibromyalgia. This scoping review offers a feasible means for describing the evidence specific to dance and fibromyalgia; results will provide unique insights concerning the breadth and depth of literature in the area. An analysis of this body of literature as a whole may reveal new research directions or unknown ways this intervention could strengthen current management approaches of the disease.
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 | 0.064 | 0.065 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.016 | 0.019 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.014 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.075 | 0.011 |
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".