Effects of reformer pilates on body composition, strength, and psychosomatic factors in overweight and obese women A randomized controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aims to examine the effects of Reformer Pilates exercises on body composition, strength, endurance, and psychosomatic parameters in overweight and obese women. The study is a randomized controlled study. A total of 47 overweight and obese women between the ages of 30-60, with a BMI of 25 kg/m² and above in the study. Two different groups were formed the exercise group (n:23, age: 46,70 ± 9,77 years) and the control group (n:24, age: 45,37 ± 9,63 years). Reformer Pilates exercises are given 3 times a week for 8 weeks. The upper extremity strength with a handgrip dynamometer, muscle endurance with McGill endurance test, body composition with Bioelectrical Impedance, sleep quality with Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index, and depression/ anxiety level with The Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale were evaluated. All evaluations were assessed before and after Reformer Pilates exercise training. There was a significant difference in body composition, upper extremity strength, endurance, and depression/anxiety scale (p values respectively 0.011; 0.000; 0.000; 0.025; 0.031) in the Reformer Pilates group. There were no statistical differences between the groups in the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index value (p = 0.055). Reformer Pilates improves body composition, increases muscle strength and endurance, and reduces depression and anxiety in overweight and obese women.Trial registration: NCT05176912 (04/01/2022).
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".