Usporedba učinkovitosti vježba za stabilizaciju sakroilijakalnih zglobova s nošenjem potpornog pojasa radi smanjenja simptoma sakroilijakalne disfunkcije u trudnoći [Effectiveness of exercise compared to wearing support belt in order to stabilize the sacroiliac joints and reduce the symptoms of sacroiliac dysfunction in pregnancy]
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To determine the effectiveness of exercise as a very important therapeutic intervention to stabilize the sacroiliac joints and the supporting belt in pregnant women with sacroiliac dysfunction. Methods: A randomized controlled study involving 240 patients with sacroiliac dysfunction in pregnancy. The subjects were randomly selected into two groups, 120 in each with 40 per each trimester. The study group carried out the exercise to stabilize the sacroiliac joints 3 times a week for 45 minutes while the control group was wearing a support belt during routine daily activities. After two weeks pain intensity by numerical rating scale and the level of disability during daily activities by Quebec scale were assessed. Results: Pain intensity and the degree of disability caused by sacroiliac dysfunction increases from the beginning to the end of pregnancy. There was a statistically significant reduction in pain intensity (P <0.01, P <0.05) and the degree of disability (P <0.01, P <0.05) after both interventions were applied. There was a connection between pain intensity and the degree of disability in the study group (p <0.56). The study group performed significantly better regarding reduction in pain and the degree of disability compared to the control group (P <0.05). Conclusion: Exercise used to stabilize the sacroiliac joints was more effective in stabiliz ation of the sacroiliac joints during pregnancy in women with sacroiliac dysfunction.
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) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".