The Effect of Exercise Plan Based on FITT Protocol on Primary Dysmenorrhea in Medical Students: A Clinical Trial Study.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: We aimed to investigate the effects of exercise based on a specific protocol on the severity and duration of primary dysmenorrhea in students residing in dormitories of Hamadan University of Medical Sciences, western Iran in 2017. STUDY DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial study. METHODS: Overall, 86 students (43 in the interventional group and 43 in the control group) with mild to moderate dysmenorrhea were enrolled. The exercise based on the FITT protocol (Intensity of exercise, time of exercise, and type of exercise) was implemented for the interventional group in 8 weeks. The McGill Pain scale was used to determine the severity of pain in dysmenorrhea. Duration of pain was calculated in terms of the day. Research data were analyzed using SPSS 20 and the significance level was considered 0.05. RESULTS: The mean dysmenorrhea severity in the first menstrual cycle after the intervention in intervention group was significantly lower than the control group (3.06 (1.78) and 4.74 (2.14), respectively) and in the second menstrual cycle (2.01 (1.54) and 4.61 (2.01) respectively) (P<0.001). The mean duration of dysmenorrhea in the first menstrual cycle after the intervention in intervention group was less than the control group (1.29 (0.92) and 2.32 (1.26) respectively) P<0.001) and in the second menstrual cycle (0.94 (0.93) and 2.13 (1.24) respectively) P<0.001). CONCLUSION: Sports activities based on a certain and organized protocol could improve dysmenorrhea.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".