Physical activity throughout pregnancy: guideline critical appraisal and implementation tool.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The 2019 Canadian guideline for physical activity throughout pregnancy provides evidencebased recommendations to promote maternal, fetal, and neonatal health. We aimed to 1) critically appraise the 2019 Canadian guideline for physical activity throughout pregnancy; and 2) develop a guideline summary for clinicians to facilitate the uptake of recommendations into practice. METHODS: We used the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) instrument to critically appraise the quality and reporting of this guideline. Four reviewers independently scored between 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree) for 23 items organized into six quality domains. RESULTS: AGREE II quality domain scores ranged from 47%-64% and the overall quality of the guideline was rated as 83% (high quality). CONCLUSION: Based on its methodological quality, we recommend the use of this guideline. Our guideline summary includes six recommendations and other safety precautions that are relevant for clinicians in Canada.
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 | 0.158 | 0.435 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.015 | 0.014 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.004 |
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".