Expert advice about therapeutic exercise during pregnancy reduces the symptoms of sacroiliac dysfunction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives There are growing evidence that exercise improves sacroiliac dysfunction symptoms in pregnant women; but no data about the effect of expert advice regarding this matter. The aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness of expert advice about therapeutic exercise on sacroiliac dysfunction in pregnancy. Methods A total of 500 women with sacroiliac dysfunction diagnosed in pregnancy were randomized in study and control group. Study group has conducted expert advice on therapeutic exercise; while control group continued with their normal lifestyle. Pain intensity by Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and degree of functional disability by Quebec scale were assessed at enrolment and after 3 and 6 weeks. Results Significantly better reduction in pain intensity assessed by VAS (p=0.001) and degree of functional disability assessed by Quebec scale (p=0.001) was noted in study compared to control group. Better results for both outcome measures were obtained if intervention was implemented earlier i.e., in second (p=0.001; p=0.001) compared to third (p=0.005; p=0.001) trimester. Strong positive correlation was found between pain intensity and degree of functional disability in both groups. Conclusions Expert advice on therapeutic exercise is effective in reduction of sacroiliac dysfunction symptoms during pregnancy. Trial registration ACTRN12617000556347.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".