SINTOMAS DE DEPRESSÃO DURANTE A GRAVIDEZ, EXERCÍCIO/ATIVIDADE FÍSICA E FATORES SOCIODEMOGRÁFICOS: UMA REVISÃO SISTEMÁTICA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This systematic review aimed to describe the symptoms of depression during pregnancy and their association with exercise/physical activity and sociodemographic factors. It followed PRISMA recommendations and was registered on the Open Science Framework (OSF). Eligibility criteria followed the PECO design where P represents pregnant individuals, E refers to exercise/physical activity and sociodemographic factors, C involves the practice of exercise/physical activity and non-exposure to sociodemographic factors, leading to the research question: 'What is the association between depressive symptoms during pregnancy, the practice of exercise/physical activity, and sociodemographic factors?' Studies in English or Portuguese, observational, up to April 2023 were included. Information sources included MEDLINE (Pubmed), Scopus, LILACS, and Cochrane. The methodological quality of the studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Eighteen studies were included, with 15 of them showing an improvement in depressive symptoms associated with the practice of exercise/physical activity and favorable sociodemographic factors. Thirteen (72.22%) were of good quality, four (22.22%) of reasonable quality, and one (5.55%) of poor quality. The main findings lead to the conclusion that depressive symptoms were present in sedentary pregnant individuals, and sociodemographic factors acted as moderators of exercise/physical activity practice.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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; 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".