[PHYSICAL ACTIVITY DURING PREGNANCY AND AFTER BIRTH].
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Physical activity (PA) decreases morbidity, improves quality of life and elongates life span. PA during pregnancy is safe and decreases complications. Physical inactivity during pregnancy is an independent risk factor for maternal weight gain and complications. Pregnancy is a golden opportunity to promote a healthy lifestyle. OBJECTIVES: This article aims to review the latest recommendations regarding PA in pregnancy. In this article we focused on the following: The joint guidelines of the Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada's (SOGC) and the Canadian Society for Exercise Physiology (CSEP), the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) committee opinion, and the ACSM's (American College of Sports Medicine) Guidelines for Exercise Testing and Prescription, the 11th Edition published in 2019, 2020 and 2022 respectively. CONCLUSIONS: PA during pregnancy is safe and essential. Every pregnant woman without contraindications should perform 150 weekly minutes of aerobic exercise and resistance training. DISCUSSION: A weekly goal of 150 medium intensity aerobic exercise minutes spread over at least 3 separate days combined with resistance training is recommended for every pregnant woman, including women who were inactive prior to the pregnancy, those diagnosed with gestational diabetes and overweight or obese women. Pregnant women with absolute contraindication can continue to perform their daily activities but avoid more intense activities, those with relative contraindications should discuss the advantages and risks of PA with their attending physician. After birth, women can return to PA gradually depending on the mode of delivery and complications encountered.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.033 | 0.009 |
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".