Physical Activity Behaviors and Barriers in Multifetal Pregnancy: What to Expect When You’re Expecting More
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The health benefits of prenatal physical activity (PA) are established for singleton pregnancies. In contrast, individuals with multifetal pregnancies (twins, triplets or more) are recommended to restrict or cease PA. The objectives of the current study were to determine behaviors and barriers to PA in multifetal pregnancies. Between 29 May and 24 July 2020, individuals with multifetal pregnancies participated in an online survey. Of the 415 respondents, there were 366 (88%) twin, 45 (11%) triplet and 4 (1%) quadruplet pregnancies. Twenty-seven percent (n = 104/388) of respondents completed no PA at all during pregnancy, 57% (n = 220/388) completed PA below current recommendations, and 16% (n = 64/388) achieved current recommendations (150-min per week of moderate-intensity activity). Most respondents (n = 314/363 [87%]) perceived barriers to PA during multifetal pregnancy. The most prominent were physical symptoms (n = 204/363 [56%]) and concerns about risks to fetal wellbeing (n = 128/363 [35%]). Sixty percent (n = 92/153) felt that these barriers could be overcome but expressed the need for evidence-based information regarding PA in multifetal pregnancy. Individuals with multifetal pregnancies have low engagement with current PA recommendations but remain physically active in some capacity. There are physical and psychosocial barriers to PA in multifetal pregnancy and future research should focus on how these can be removed.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".