MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407793510 · doi:10.1177/10497315251316844

Efficacy of a Combined Aerobic Exercise and Mindfulness Intervention on Depressive Symptoms: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial

2025· article· en· W4407793510 on OpenAlexaff
Xiaoqi Wei, Hehui Li, Yuncheng Jia, Diyang Qu, Sitong Chen, Liuyue Huang, Shiyun Chen, He Bu, Joelle LeMoult, Gabriel Zieff, Lin Li, Xiaochun Chi

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch on Social Work Practice · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMindfulness and Compassion Interventions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Science Foundation of Guangdong Province
KeywordsMindfulnessRandomized controlled trialAerobic exercisePhysical therapyIntervention (counseling)PsychologyDepressive symptomsClinical psychologyMedicinePsychotherapistPsychiatryAnxietyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: The current study aimed to preliminarily examine the effectiveness and acceptability of a combined exercise + mindfulness intervention on depressive symptoms among healthy Chinese university students (study 1) and those with subthreshold depression (study 2). Methods: Two 2 (intervention group vs. control group) × 2 (pretest vs. posttest) randomized controlled trials were conducted in healthy students without subthreshold depression and students with subthreshold depression, respectively. Description analysis, linear mixed-effects models, and qualitative analysis were used in both studies. Results: Results of both studies showed that the combined intervention was acceptable and effective in preventing and reducing depressive symptoms, with small effect sizes for healthy students ( d = −0.47) and large effect sizes for subthreshold depression students ( d = −1.51), respectively. Conclusions: The aerobic exercise plus mindfulness intervention was evidenced to be a preventive and therapeutic measure of depressive symptoms among university students.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.457
Teacher spread0.386 · 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 designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch on Social Work PracticeSame topicMindfulness and Compassion InterventionsFrench-language works237,207