MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408876001 · doi:10.1136/bjsports-2025-109785

2025 Canadian guideline for physical activity, sedentary behaviour and sleep throughout the first year post partum

2025· article· en· W4408876001 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Margie H. Davenport, Stéphanie-May Ruchat, Alejandra Jaramillo Garcia, Muhammad Usman Ali, Milena Forte, Nicole Beamish, Karen Fleming, Kristi B. Adamo, Émilie Brunet-Pagé, Radha Chari, Kirstin N. Lane, Michelle F. Mottola, Sarah Neil‐Sztramko

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Sports Medicine · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGestational Diabetes Research and Management
Canadian institutionsImpactChildren’s Health Research InstituteWestern UniversityUniversity of VictoriaSunnybrook Health Science CentreHealth Sciences CentreMount Sinai HospitalUniversity of OttawaPublic Health Agency of CanadaQueen's UniversityMcMaster UniversityUniversité du Québec à Trois-RivièresWomen and Children’s Health Research InstituteUniversity of Alberta
FundersUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
KeywordsGuidelineMedicineGrading (engineering)Systematic reviewHealth careChildbirthPostpartum periodDelphi methodEvidence-based practiceFamily medicineCritical appraisalMEDLINEPhysical therapyNursingAlternative medicinePregnancy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This consensus aims to provide guidance for postpartum women and people, healthcare providers and exercise professionals on physical activity, sedentary behaviour and sleep throughout the first year postpartum. The development of this guideline followed the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology and the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II instrument. The Guideline Consensus Panel consisted of representatives from key professional groups, researchers and methodological experts. Literature was retrieved through searches of 12 online databases, and articles on maternal physical activity, sedentary behaviour or sleep in the first year after childbirth were eligible for inclusion if they reported on any of 21 maternal or infant health outcomes, which were prioritised considering the preferences and values of postpartum individuals. There was no restriction on language, and all study designs were eligible except for case studies. The certainty of evidence was rated using GRADE. This evidence review produced seven systematic reviews, which informed this consensus statement. A Delphi process was conducted to identify relative contraindications to postpartum moderate-intensity to vigorous-intensity physical activity, which informed the development of the Get Active Questionnaire for Postpartum. Evidence to decision tables were developed, and feedback on the recommendations was solicited from end users (healthcare providers, exercise professionals, researchers, policy organisations and postpartum women and people). Adhering to these consensus recommendations for postpartum women and people is likely to result in large improvements in psychological well-being, as well as pelvic, musculoskeletal and cardiometabolic health, and reduced fatigue, while not experiencing adverse events (moderate certainty evidence). Most end users indicated that following these recommendations would be feasible, acceptable and equitable, and likely to require minimal resources from individual and health systems perspectives. PROSPERO registration number CRD42022359282.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.034
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.366
Threshold uncertainty score0.735

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.034
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.005
Bibliometrics0.0070.006
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0070.002
Research integrity0.0070.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0290.014

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.314 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations40
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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