Is pelvic floor loading in female runners associated with post‐run changes in pelvic floor morphometry or function?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives To investigate whether, among female runners, transient changes in pelvic floor morphometry, pelvic floor muscle (PFM) function, or pad weight gain observed after a standardised running protocol are associated with the exposure of the pelvic floor to loading during the run. Methods Adult female runners with ( n = 19) and without ( n = 19) running‐induced stress urinary incontinence (RI‐SUI) completed a 37‐min treadmill‐based running protocol with a pressure sensor placed in the posterior fornix of the vagina and a triaxial accelerometer adhered to the pelvis, and an incontinence pad adhered to their undergarment. Pelvic morphometry and PFM function were assessed before and after the run using transperineal ultrasonography and intra‐vaginal dynamometry. Urine leakage volume was estimated based on incontinence pad weight gain. Separate linear regression models were used to evaluate the associations between variables representative of pelvic floor load exposure (posterior fornix sensor pressure [PFSP] and pelvic accelerations) and changes in pelvic morphometry, PFM function, and incontinence pad weight observed after the run. Results After the run, the levator hiatus was larger and the bladder neck sat lower in the pelvis, but there were no significant differences in PFM active or passive forces measured using dynamometry. These changes were not different between those with and those without RI‐SUI. Higher pelvic accelerations were associated with greater reductions in passive PFM stiffness after the run ( R 2 = 20%–27%), but not with changes in pelvic morphometry. No associations were found between any measures of pelvic floor load exposure and changes in PFM force‐generating capacity. Among runners with RI‐SUI, greater pad weight gain occurred among those who ran with slower vector accelerations ( R 2 = 0.27). Conclusion The magnitude of pelvic floor loading experienced during running does not appear to influence the transient loss in static pelvic organ support observed after running nor urine leakage volume.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".