A study on the effect of pilates exercise, kinesio tape and combined method onpain and functional disability in non-specific chronic low back pain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chronic LBP is a growing problem in many communities there is no consensus regarding the most appropriate therapeutic intervention. Recently, Pilates exercise has been suggested as a therapeutic exercise as well as Kinesio Tape to reduce pain, swelling and muscle spasms, and prevent sport injury. So the purpose of this study is to investigate the effect of Pilates exercise, Kinesio Tape and combined method on the intensity of pain and functional disability in men with nonspecific Chronic LBP. 39 men with nonspecific chronic LBP with mean age of 54/74 years were assigned into three equal groups of 13 persons. Each group was treated with either Pilates exercise, kinesio tape or combined method for 6 weeks. Visual analogue scale and Quebec functional disability questionnaire were used to assess pain and functional disability consecutively before and after treatment. Significant improvement was shown in pain and functional disability in all three groups (P<0.001). The most significant improvement were observed in combined method compared with Kinesio tape and Pilates groups (P<0.001). The combination of Pilates exercise and Kinesio Tape has better effects in decreasing pain and functional improvement in men with non-specific Chronic LBP.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".