A randomized trial of the effects of an aquatic exercise program on depression, anxiety levels, and functional capacity of people who suffered an ischemic stroke
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Aquatic exercise programs are used in rehabilitation and might help to reduce disability after stroke. This was a randomized intervention trial to assess the influence of an aquatic exercise program on people suffering from depression and anxiety after ischemic stroke. METHODS: Participants were randomized to an experimental group (EG) composed of 19 individuals (51.8±8.5 years; ten males and nine females), and a control group (CG) composed of 17 people (52.7±6.7 years; nine males and eight females). The aquatic exercise program consisted of two sessions per week, each lasting between 45 and 60 minutes and divided into 5 to 10 minutes exercise sections during 12 weeks. The State-Trait Anxiety Inventory was used to determine anxiety levels while the Beck Depression Inventory was used as a self-assessment of depression. RESULTS: EG improved measures of depression, anxiety trait and anxiety state between pre- and post-treatment, with no changes in CG. EG improved in all tests related to functional capacity compared to CG. CONCLUSIONS: The practice of aquatic exercises promotes improvements in the levels of depression and anxiety in people who suffered an ischemic stroke.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".