Effect of the association of continuous shortwave diathermy and Pilates-based exercises on pain, depression, and anxiety in chronic non-specific low back pain: a randomized clinical trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chronic nonspecific low back pain (CNLBP) is the most common musculoskeletal condition, which can be influenced by nociceptive, psychosocial, cognitive, and affective aspects, causing vulnerabilities and impairing the individual's ability to manage pain. The association of continuous shortwave diathermy (CSWD) with Pilates-based exercises may contribute to reduce pain, depression, and anxiety in patients with CNLBP. A single-blind randomized clinical trial was performed in which 36 patients with CNLBP were divided into a control group that received placebo CSWD and an intervention group that received active CSWD. Both groups received 12 sessions of Pilates-based exercises. Pain, depression, and anxiety variables were evaluated using the McGill questionnaire, the Beck Depression Inventory, and the Visual Analog Anxiety Scale. Assessments were performed at baseline, after three and six weeks of treatment, and at the three-month follow-up. The Shapiro-Wilk test, Student's t-test, Mann-Whitney U test, chi-squared test, and repeated measures ANOVA, with α=0.05, were used to compare the outcomes, and indicated that active CSWD did not present additional improvement in the assessed variables in CNLBP patients compared to the placebo group. Both groups improved pain and depression at follow-up and reduced anxiety only during Pilates-based exercises. Therefore, only Pilates-based exercises seemed sufficient to manage patients with CNLBP.
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 | 0.104 | 0.071 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".