MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2896541720 · doi:10.1136/bjsports-2018-099780

Prenatal exercise (including but not limited to pelvic floor muscle training) and urinary incontinence during and following pregnancy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2018· review· en· W2896541720 on OpenAlexafffund
Margie H. Davenport, Taniya S. Nagpal, Michelle F. Mottola, Rachel J. Skow, Laurel Riske, Veronica J. Poitras, Alejandra Jaramillo Garcia, Casey Gray, Nick Barrowman, Victoria L. Meah, Frances Sobierajski, Marina James, Megan Nuspl, Ashley Weeks, Andrée-Anne Marchand, Linda Slater, Kristi B. Adamo, Gregory Davies, Rubén Barakat, Stéphanie-May Ruchat

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Sports Medicine · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPelvic floor disorders treatments
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityUniversité du Québec à Trois-RivièresChildren's Hospital of Eastern OntarioChildren’s Health Research InstituteWestern UniversityUniversity of OttawaWomen and Children’s Health Research InstituteUniversity of Alberta
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchHeart and Stroke Foundation of Canada
KeywordsMedicineUrinary incontinenceContraindicationAerobic exerciseMeta-analysisPhysical therapyPregnancyPopulationOdds ratioRandomized controlled trialPelvic floorObstetricsInternal medicineSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective To examine the relationships between prenatal physical activity and prenatal and postnatal urinary incontinence (UI). Design Systematic review with random effects meta-analysis and meta-regression. Data sources Online databases were searched up to 6 January 2017. Study eligibility criteria Studies of all designs were included (except case studies) if they were published in English, Spanish or French and contained information on the Population (pregnant women without contraindication to exercise), Intervention (subjective or objective measures of frequency, intensity, duration, volume or type of exercise, alone [“exercise-only”] or in combination with other intervention components [e.g., dietary; “exercise + co-intervention”]), Comparator (no exercise or different frequency, intensity, duration, volume and type of exercise) and Outcome (prenatal or postnatal UI). Results 24 studies (n=15 982 women) were included. ‘Low’ to ‘moderate’ quality evidence revealed prenatal pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT) with or without aerobic exercise decreased the odds of UI in pregnancy (15 randomised controlled trials (RCTs), n=2764 women; OR 0.50, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.68, I 2 =60%) and in the postpartum period (10 RCTs, n=1682 women; OR 0.63, 95% CI 0.51, 0.79, I 2 =0%). When we analysed the data by whether women were continent or incontinent prior to the intervention, exercise was beneficial at preventing the development of UI in women with continence, but not effective in treating UI in women with incontinence. There was ‘low’ quality evidence that prenatal exercise had a moderate effect in the reduction of UI symptom severity during (five RCTs, standard mean difference (SMD) −0.54, 95% CI −0.88 to –0.20, I 2 =64%) and following pregnancy (three RCTs, ‘moderate’ quality evidence; SMD −0.54, 95% CI −0.87 to –0.22, I 2 =24%). Conclusion Prenatal exercise including PFMT reduced the odds and symptom severity of prenatal and postnatal UI. This was the case for women who were continent before the intervention. Among women who were incontinent during pregnancy, exercise training was not therapeutic.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.416
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0140.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.062
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.260 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations95
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of Sports MedicineSame topicPelvic floor disorders treatmentsFrench-language works237,207