The Use of Massage to Support Emotional and Physical Health in a Pregnancy After Stillbirth: a Case Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: To observe the effects of massage aiming to support a mum in her pregnancy after a previous stillbirth. The client's goal varied over the course of her pregnancy, but her main motivation was to help manage the anxiety and stress of pregnancy after a previous stillbirth. Methods: A 32-year-old pregnant woman received seven massages over a seven-month period. The Measure Yourself Concerns and Wellbeing (MYCaW) outcome measure was used at each session to identify the client's concerns at that time point. Written feedback was also sought from the client just prior to her giving birth. Results: The client's concerns included anxiety, sciatica, stress, shoulder tension/soreness, and a lack of sleep. The client experienced a decrease in each concern after each treatment over the seven sessions and experienced improved well-being after each session. The client self-reported that the massage helped her cope, saying: "I'm not sure how I would have coped if I didn't have her sessions." Conclusions: Massage is a treatment option for women experiencing pregnancy after stillbirth, which can provide physical and emotional support.
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 | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".