MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4220935162 · doi:10.1186/s40814-022-01024-0

Effects of a motor control exercise program on lumbopelvic pain recurrences and intensity in pregnant women with a history of lumbopelvic pain: a study protocol for a randomized controlled feasibility trial

2022· article· en· W4220935162 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Catherine Daneau, Andrée-Anne Marchand, André Bussières, Julie O’Shaughnessy, Stéphanie-May Ruchat, Martin Descarreaux

Bibliographic record

VenuePilot and Feasibility Studies · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPregnancy-related medical research
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
FundersRéseau Provincial de Recherche en Adaptation-RéadaptationUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
KeywordsRandomized controlled trialMedicinePhysical therapyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationIntensity (physics)Surgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: About 50% of women experience lumbopelvic pain (LBPP) during their pregnancy. LBPP has negative repercussions on sleep, social and sexual life, physical and work capacity, and psychological health and contributes to physical inactivity. The benefits of LBPP prevention or treatment in pregnant women through specific exercises should therefore be further investigated. This study protocol has been designed to establish the feasibility of implementing motor control exercise program with pregnant women presenting with a history of LBPP. METHODS/DESIGN: Forty pregnant women with a history of LBPP will be recruited and randomly allocated to a control (20 participants) or intervention (20 participants) group. The control group will receive standard prenatal care, including basic information on what to do when suffering from LBPP. The intervention group will participate in three 40-min exercise sessions per week from < 20 weeks until 34-36 weeks of gestation: one supervised group session via the Zoom platform (once a month, this session will take place at the Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières) and two unsupervised sessions at home. A motor control exercise program will be developed to target strengthening of the lumbo-pelvic-hip core muscles and improve spinal and pelvic stabilization. Participants of this group will also receive standard prenatal care. Women of the control group will receive after 6 weeks postpartum an exercise program designed to reduce LBPP they may have developed during pregnancy and that may persist after delivery. Primary outcomes will be participants' recruitment, retention and adherence rates, safety, and acceptability of the intervention. Secondary outcomes will include LBPP incidence, frequency, and intensity, as well as self-reported functional disability, physical activity levels, fear avoidance behavior, anxiety, and depression. DISCUSSION: This study will inform the feasibility of conducting a full-scale randomized controlled study to test the effectiveness of a motor control exercise program on the prevention and treatment of LBPP in women with a history of LBPP. Adequate prevention and treatment of pregnant women with a history of LBPP should help limit the recurrences of LBPP or the aggravation of its intensity during pregnancy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: US National Institutes of Health Clinical Trials registry NCT04253717 April 27, 2021.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.094

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0080.004
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0060.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0280.004

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.

Opus teacher head0.104
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.289 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePilot and Feasibility StudiesSame topicPregnancy-related medical researchFrench-language works237,207