Eight-week equipment-based Pilates exercises positively affects quality of life, and functional capacity in non-active adult women: a randomized controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Pilates exercises are popular for muscle conditioning among women. However, the effects on conditioning of healthy non-active adult women due to Pilates practicing are not fully explained. The aim of this randomized controlled trial was to assess the effects of equipment-based Pilates exercises on the percentage of body fat, weight, body mass index (BMI), functional capacity, and quality of life of adult healthy women. METHODS: Seventy-eight non-active women were randomly assigned to 2 groups (Pilates or Control). The Pilates group performed a total of 16 exercise sessions (60 minutes each, performed twice a week for 8 consecutive weeks). The control group was instructed to perform no exercise. Percentage of body fat (DXA scans), weight, BMI, distance covered in the incremental shuttle walk test, maximal oxygen uptake (VO2max), and quality of life (SF-36 scores) were analyzed. RESULTS: There were no significant between-group differences at baseline, but significant group-by-time interaction was observed for Pilates group postintervention. Higher distance covered (P=0.01), VO2max (P=0.04), and quality of life (P=0.04) were observed after the intervention compared to the control group. No differences were observed for body composition. CONCLUSIONS: Two months of equipment-based Pilates training improved functional capacity and quality of life in healthy adult women.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.001 |
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".