Relationship Between Location of Pregnancy-Related and Postpartum-Related Back Pain and Limitations of Daily Activities and Work Participation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aims of this study were to (1) examine if the location of pregnancy-related back pain impacts activities of daily living and absence from work and (2) determine which types of pain were more likely to persist postpartum. METHODS: This was a secondary analysis of data from an observational cohort study. Data were collected in Ontario between 2013 and 2014. Four pain location groups were identified, including low back pain (LBP), pelvic girdle pain (PGP), combined pain, and mixed pain. Logistic regression models were used to examine the impact of pain location on activity and absence from work. Descriptive analyses explored the association between pregnancy pain location and postpartum pain patterns. RESULTS: We surveyed 305 pregnant participants and followed up with 80 of these participants up to 6 months postpartum. Data analysis showed approximately a 2-fold increase in interference with employment (outside the home) and self-grooming for those with combined pain compared to those only experiencing LBP. Respondents with PGP and combined PGP and LBP had approximately a 5-fold increased likelihood of absence from work compared to respondents with only LBP; those with a mixture of LBP and PGP had a 13-fold increase in likelihood. Approximately 50% of respondents reported being pain-free, 16% experienced lingering pain, and 38% experienced persistent pain within 6 months postpartum. Those with combined pain during pregnancy continued to have persistent pain up to 6 months postpartum. CONCLUSION: The results suggest that the location of pregnancy-related back pain is associated with interference in daily activities, an increase in absence from work, and the persistence of postpartum pain. For this cohort, back pain did not always resolve after delivery, and those experiencing pregnancy-related combined pain continued to experience symptoms postpartum.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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; 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".