Physical exercise programme during pregnancy decreases perinatal depression risk: a randomised controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The incidence of depression is high during the perinatal period. This mood disorder can have a significant impact on the mother, the child and the family. OBJECTIVE: To examine the effect of an exercise programme during pregnancy on the risk of perinatal depression. METHODS: Healthy women who were <16 weeks pregnant were randomly assigned to two different groups. Women in the intervention group participated in a 60 min exercise programme throughout pregnancy, 3 days per week, which was conducted from October 2014 to December 2016. The Center for Epidemiological Studies-Depression Scale was used to measure the risk of depression at the beginning of the study (12-16 weeks), at gestational week 38 and at 6 weeks postpartum. RESULTS: One hundred and twenty-four pregnant women were allocated to either the intervention (IG=70) or the control (CG=54) group. No differences were found in the percentage of depressed women at baseline (20% vs 18.5%) (χ2=0.043; p=0.836). A smaller percentage of depressed women were identified in the IG compared with the CG at 38 gestational weeks (18.6% vs 35.6%) (χ2=4.190; p=0.041) and at 6 weeks postpartum (14.5% vs 29.8%) (χ2=3.985; p=0.046) using the per-protocol analysis. No significant differences were found using the intention-to-treat analyses, except in the multiple imputation analysis at week 38 (18.6% vs 34.4%) (χ2=4.085; p=0.049). CONCLUSION: An exercise programme performed during pregnancy may reduce the prevalence of depression in late pregnancy and postpartum. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02420288; Results.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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".