MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4411433433 · doi:10.1016/j.ard.2025.06.1009

ABS1194-HPR INVESTIGATION OF BALANCE AND CORE ENDURANCE IN PATIENTS WITH FIBROMYALGIA SYNDROME

2025· article· en· W4411433433 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Songül Bağlan Yentür, Muhammet Şahin Elbastı, Birsen Harun Dağdeviren, Demir Çetintaş

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of the Rheumatic Diseases · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFibromyalgia and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineFibromyalgiaPhysical therapyBalance (ability)Fibromyalgia syndromeCore (optical fiber)Chronic fatigue syndromePhysical medicine and rehabilitationInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Fourty five % of Fibromyalgia Syndrome (FMS) patients was reported to complain of balance impairment that may be due to sensory deficits, cognitive impairment and clinical symptoms such as pain, sleep problems, fatigue, muscle weakness. Although there are studies on the relationship between balance problems and core stability, there are no studies evaluating core stability in patients with FMS to the authors' knowledge. Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare core endurance and balance in patients with FMS with healthy subjects and to evaluate the relationship between core endurance and balance. Methods: The study included 44 FMS patients and 44 age- and sex-matched healthy controls. Demographic data of the participants were recorded. Then, core endurance was assessed with McGill core endurance tests, balance was evaluated with HUR BTG4 Balance Master System and Berg Balance Scale (BBS), and function was assessed with Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire (FIQ). Results: The assessment parameters were completed by all participants in the study. There was no significant difference between patients with FMS and healthy controls in demographics (p>0.05). There were significant differences between the BBS and static and dynamic balance assessments between the groups (p<0.05). A significant difference was found in the trunk extension and prone bridge tests of static core endurance tests and BBS in patients with FMS compared to the control group (p<0.001). There was a moderate negative correlation between side bridge test- right and eyes closed balance test in stable platform-velocity measurement (r=-0.309, p=0.042). Significant correlations were found between BBS and eyes closed balance test in unstable platform- area (r=0.328, p=0.030) and eyes closed balance test in unstable platform- length (r=0.329, p=0.029). Conclusion: Patients with FMS was concluded to have impaired core endurance and balance compared to healthy subjects. However, static and dynamic balance and core endurance tests were not significantly correlated in patients with FMS. This may be interpreted that balance does not affect the decreased core endurance in patients with FMS. Further studies should investigate the factors affecting core endurance in FMS patients. REFERENCES: [1] Tas NP, Baykara RA, Erdal A, Kal GA. Relationship Between Balance and Vitamin D in Fibromyalgia Syndrome: A Prospective Cross-Sectional Study with HUR BTG4 Balance Master System®. SN Compr Clin Med. 28 Eylül 2023;5(1):233. [2] Sindwani D, Kaur M. A comparison of core muscle endurance of females with fibromyalgia versus healthy females: An observational study. Revista Colombiana de Reumatología [İnternet]. 2023. Acknowledgements: NIL . Disclosure of Interests: None declared . © The Authors 2025. This abstract is an open access article published in Annals of Rheumatic Diseases under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). Neither EULAR nor the publisher make any representation as to the accuracy of the content. The authors are solely responsible for the content in their abstract including accuracy of the facts, statements, results, conclusion, citing resources etc.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 designObservational
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 venueAnnals of the Rheumatic Diseases→Same topicFibromyalgia and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome Research→French-language works237,207→