Maternal brain plasticity, physiology and exercise science: A scoping narrative review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The perinatal period is characterized by extreme shifts in hormones, neurochemistry, and life experiences that drive significant changes in the brain, known as maternal plasticity. Due to rising maternal health conditions, such as postpartum depression, there is a critical need to investigate factors, such as engagement in physical activity and exercise, that may mitigate susceptibility to maladaptive maternal plasticity. This scoping review aims to analyze exercise interventions and maternal brain outcomes during reproduction. METHODS: A systematic search was completed in Medline, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, SportDiscuss. The key concepts of the search were (i) brain plasticity, (ii) maternal reproductive period including pre-conception, pregnancy, and postpartum, and (iii) exercise interventions. Due to the limited amount of evidence available on this topic, the review findings were discussed using a combined scoping and narrative review approach. RESULTS: The search produced 2,167 unique articles after removing 2588 duplicates. Covidence software was used for the screening procedure. Following title and abstract screening, 2160 articles were deemed irrelevant and removed. Seven articles moved forward to full-text screening. One article was excluded during full-text screening for wrong outcomes, leaving six papers for extraction. Extraction revealed that four out of six studies were conducted in the rodent alone, one was conducted in humans alone and one was conducted in both a human and a rodent model. DISCUSSION: The methodological inconsistencies in the limited number of studies within this field highlight the need for standardization, which motivated the development of the Consensus on Exercise Reporting Template for animal research. Moreover, the present review highlights future directions and knowledge gaps, emphasizing the critical need for high-quality research to address the many unanswered questions regarding the impact of exercise on the maternal brain.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".