An 8-week thoracic spine stabilization exercise program improves postural back pain, spine alignment, postural sway, and core endurance in university students:a randomized controlled study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND/AIM: To investigate the effects of an 8-week thoracic stabilization exercise program on back pain, spinal alignment, postural sway, and core endurance in university students. MATERIALS AND METHODS: University students were randomly allocated into exercise (n: 28) and control (n: 25) groups. The exercise program was carried out 3 days a week for 8 weeks. Postural pain, spinal alignment, postural sway, and core endurance were assessed via visual analogue scale, Spinal Mouse, Biodex Balance System, and McGill's trunk muscle endurance tests at the baseline and after 8 weeks of training. RESULTS: Differences were observed for postural pain, thoracic and lumbar curvature, dynamic stability index (eyes closed), and core endurance scores in the exercise group between baseline and week 8 (P < 0.05) and all the parameters were significantly different when compared to those of the control group (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: The program decreased postural pain, spinal curvatures, and postural sway, and increased core endurance in university students. The program can be effective in postural pain and misalignment of spine problems related to core weakness and balance disorders.
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 | 0.015 | 0.004 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".