Effect of Aerobic Exercise on the Levels of Pain, Quality of Life, and Alexithymia in Alexithymic Individuals With Chronic Pain: A Single-Blinded Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to investigate the effects of aerobic exercise on pain, degree of alexithymia, and quality of life in individuals with alexithymia and chronic pain. METHODS: A total of 40 participants who scored 61 or higher on the Toronto Alexithymia Scale-20 (TAS-20) were included in the study. The sample was subdivided into 2 groups using a computerized randomization program: an aerobic exercise group (n = 20) and a control group (n = 20). Participants in the aerobic exercise group underwent a 30-minute jogging protocol at 60% to 90% of maximum heart rate 3 days per week for 8 weeks under the supervision of a physiotherapist. Participants in the control group continued their daily physical activities. Outcome measures were the TAS-20, visual analog scale, Graded Chronic Pain Scale, and 36-Item Short Form Health Survey. RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference between the demographics of the 2 groups (P > .05). There was a statistically significant improvement in TAS-20, Graded Chronic Pain Scale, visual analog scale, and 36-Item Short Form Health Survey scores of the participants in the aerobic exercise group compared to the control group (P ˂ .05). CONCLUSION: Aerobic exercise had a positive effect on pain, quality of life, and degree of alexithymia in individuals with alexithymia and chronic 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 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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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".