MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403183923 · doi:10.1136/bjsports-2024-108483

Impact of postpartum physical activity on cardiometabolic health, breastfeeding, injury and infant growth and development: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2024· review· en· W4403183923 on OpenAlexafffund
Paris A T Jones, Amy N Moolyk, Stéphanie-May Ruchat, Muhammad Usman Ali, Karen Fleming, Sarah Meyer, Talia Noel Sjwed, Jenna B. Wowdzia, Lauren Maier, Michelle F. Mottola, Allison Sivak, Margie H. Davenport

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Sports Medicine · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGestational Diabetes Research and Management
Canadian institutionsChildren’s Health Research InstituteWestern UniversitySunnybrook Health Science CentreMcMaster UniversityUniversité du Québec à Trois-RivièresWomen and Children’s Health Research InstituteUniversity of Alberta
FundersMitacsUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
KeywordsMedicineBreastfeedingBlood pressurePopulationGlycated hemoglobinObstetricsPostpartum periodInternal medicineDiabetes mellitusType 2 diabetesPhysical therapyEndocrinologyPediatricsPregnancyEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective To examine the relationship between postpartum physical activity and maternal postnatal cardiometabolic health, breastfeeding, injury, and infant growth and development. Design Systematic review with random-effects meta-analysis and meta-regression. Data sources Eight online databases were searched up until 12 January 2024. Eligibility criteria Studies of all designs in all languages were eligible (except case studies and reviews) if they contained information on the population (postpartum people), intervention (frequency, intensity, duration, volume, or type of exercise, alone (‘exercise-only’) or in combination with other intervention components (eg, dietary; ‘exercise+co-intervention’), comparator (no or low volumes of physical activity), and outcomes: hypertension, diabetes, cardiometabolic risk factors (systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), total cholesterol, high density lipoproteins, low density lipoproteins, and triglycerides, glycated hemoglobin (HbA1C), glucose and insulin concentration), breastfeeding (breast milk quality and volume), infant growth (length and weight) and development, or postpartum injury. Results 46 unique studies (n=8766 participants) from 20 countries were included. Moderate certainty of evidence showed exercise+co-interventions reduced the odds of developing diabetes by 28% (7 randomised controlled trials (RCTs), n=2496; OR 0.72 95% CI 0.54, 0.98, I2 12%), reduced SBP (10 RCTs, n=2753; mean difference (MD) −2.15 95% CI −3.89 to –0.40, I2 73%) and DBP (9 RCTs, n=2575; MD −1.38 95% CI −2.60 to –0.15, I2 66%) compared with controls. Infant growth and development, breast milk quality and quantity, and risk of injury were not different between exercise and control groups. Conclusions Physical activity improves cardiometabolic health without adversely impacting breast milk supply or quality, infant growth or maternal injury.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.039
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.086

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.039
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0250.043
Bibliometrics0.0090.009
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.049
GPT teacher head0.394
Teacher spread0.345 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations20
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of Sports MedicineSame topicGestational Diabetes Research and ManagementFrench-language works237,207