How Is the Quality and Quantity of Primary Dysmenorrhea Affected by Physical Exercises? A Study Among Iranian Students
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: This study intended to evaluate the effect of 3 exercise programs on reducing symptoms of primary dysmenorrhea among some Iranian school girls. Materials and Methods:This randomized clinical trial study was conducted on 70 students aged 15-18 years with primary dysmenorrhea.They were randomly assigned into 4 different groups: stretch group (n = 19), massage group (n = 19), combined group (n = 21), and control group (n = 19).To evaluate the effect, the treatment was applied as 8 weeks of physical activity, 3 sessions a week, twice a day, 10 minutes for massage group, 20 minutes for stretching group and 20 minutes for combination group and without exercise for control group on primary dysmenorrhea.Moreover, to measure the intensity and severity of pain McGill's questionnaire were used.Results: The results revealed that performing a regular physical activity led to a significant reduction in the severity of dysmenorrhea pain (P < 0.05), Pain Rate Index (PRI ) (P < 0.05), visual analog scale (VAS) (P < 0.05), present pain intensity (PPI) and total pain according to McGill's short form questionnaire (TP) (P < 0.05), and volume of bleeding (P < 0.05) in the 3 groups. Conclusion:The results of this study indicated that lifestyle modifications including some physical activities would decrease the quality and quantity of pain in primary dysmenorrhea such as duration and intensity of pain.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".