Prevalence of low back, pelvic girdle, and pelvic floor complaints in pregnant elite athletes: a narrative review.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: To investigate the prevalence of low back, pelvic girdle, and pelvic floor complaints in pregnant elite athletes. Background: Common symptoms during pregnancy include low back pain, pelvic girdle pain, and pelvic floor dysfunction. There has been minimal investigation around the prevalence of these musculoskeletal disorders in the pregnant elite athlete. Methods: A narrative review was conducted using electronic databases and hand reference searching. Articles were screened based on the inclusion/exclusion criteria. Results: 727 articles were retrieved digitally, while hand and reference searching yielded one article. After removing those that did not fit the inclusion/exclusion criteria, there were a total of three articles. Summary: Prevalence of these conditions in pregnant elite athletes is variable within the literature. The values appear to change based on trimester, parity, and description of these conditions. Similarly, frequency, duration, and type of exercise may also influence the prevalence. Further investigation is warranted to help guide safe participation in elite sport activity during pregnancy.
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 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".