MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4206100078 · doi:10.54393/pbmj.v5i1.193

Comparative effects of Core Stability Exercises and Endurance Training in Patients with Mechanical Low Back Pain

2022· article· en· W4206100078 on OpenAlexaff
Javairia Khan, Palwasha Khan, Muhammad Umer Arshad, Ahsan Javed, Wajeeha Zia, Ambreen Iqbal, Ghazal Jamshaid

Bibliographic record

VenuePakistan BioMedical Journal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsRoyal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCore stabilityPhysical therapyMedicineCore (optical fiber)Low back painPsychosocialOswestry Disability IndexVisual analogue scalePhysical medicine and rehabilitationPopulationAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Low back pain is a major health problem resulting in psychosocial and physical disability. The prevalence of LBP and risk of recurrence is rising due to the sedentary life style, poor postural awareness and short term oriented intervention plans. It is the need of the time to design one or more exercise plans that can improve pain and functional disability and prevent recurrence of symptoms in patients with mechanical low back pain. Objective: The objective of this study is to compare the effects of core stability exercises and endurance training on the pain and functional disability in the population having mechanical low back pain. Materials and Methods: It was a quasi-experimental study with 74 patients with chronic low back pain, divided equally in two groups containing 37 patients each. Both groups were treated with baseline of moist heat pack in combination with interferential. Group A was treated with core stability exercises and group B was treated with endurance training for five times a week. Pre and post treatment scores were compared with NPRS for intensity of pain and Oswestry Disability Index for functional disability scores. Results: Data was analysis by SPSS.25 on 74 patients. In type of pain, about 79% of patients were suffering from moderate and severe type of pain while there were only 21% of patients who came with mild pain in both groups. Independent t-test was applied for changes between the group on NPRS scale, the results shows significant results with p<0.05. In core stability group the difference between pretreatment and post treatment was 6.08 to 1.4 and in stability group the difference was 6.13 to 1.10. Endurance training exercises on ODI, there was no one with severe disability, and 94.6 %were with minimal disability and only 5.4 % were with moderate disability. It shows that endurance training exercises were better than stability exercises. Conclusion: It is concluded that endurance training has more clinical difference on outcome measures of NPRS and ODI as compared to core stability exercises in patients with mechanical low back pain.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.214
Threshold uncertainty score0.358

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.271 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePakistan BioMedical JournalSame topicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationFrench-language works237,207