696 EP045 – A call for more comprehensive guidelines:the effect of exercise on postpartum physical activity and fitness levels – a systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background A lack of clinical practice guidelines and female specific research makes it difficult for both patients and clinicians to navigate a safe and successful return to activity (RTA) postpartum. It is unknown if current exercise interventions being provided and recommended for postpartum women are eliciting improvements in physical activity and cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF) levels. Objectives 1) To determine what exercise interventions are being implemented in the postpartum population and 2) To determine if these interventions are effective at improving physical activity levels and/or CRF. Design Systematic review and meta-analysis. Patients Postpartum women. Interventions Exercise interventions (i.e., aerobic, strength, pelvic floor etc.) to improve multiple health outcomes (physical and mental) postpartum. Main outcome measurements Physical activity levels (i.e., step count, moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) minutes) and CRF (i.e., VO2 max) were included in the meta-analysis. Results 5852 studies were screened, and 101 were summarized into the systematic review. Of these, 15 (15%) randomized controlled trials (RCTs) included outcomes related to physical activity levels (n=10) or CRF (n=5) and were pooled together in a random-effects meta-analysis. The exercise interventions in these studies were often ill-defined, with frequency, intensity, type, and time largely varying between studies (Table 1). Standardized mean differences (95% CI) indicated a small-moderate improvement in CRF [0.64, (0.20, 1.09), I2=39%] (figure 1a), but no significant improvement in physical activity levels [0.14, ( 0.09, 0.37), I2=67] (figure 1b). Conclusions Despite a large number of studies using exercise interventions to improve multiple health outcomes postpartum, few measured and elicited improvements in physical activity/fitness levels. Of these 15 studies, exercise parameters were ill-defined and inconsistent. Additionally, there were no significant improvements in physical activity levels. Therefore, it is important to improve guidelines surrounding exercise interventions to elicit positive changes in physical activity and CRF levels and improve RTA for postpartum women.
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 | 0.058 | 0.134 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.014 | 0.020 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.026 | 0.004 |
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.
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".