Exploring the effect of an 8-week AI-composed exercise program on pain intensity and well-being in patients with Spinal pain : Retrospective cohort analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Spinal pain, one of the most common musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs), significantly impacts the quality of life due to chronic pain and disability. Physical activity has shown promise in managing spinal pain, although optimizing adherence to exercise remains a challenge. The digital development of artificial intelligence (AI)-driven applications offers a possibility for guiding and supporting patients with MSDs in their daily lives. Objective: The trial aimed to investigate the effect of an 8-week AI-composed exercise program on pain intensity and well-being in patients with spinal pain. It also examined the relationship between exercise frequency, pain intensity, and well-being. In addition, app usage frequency was examined as a proxy for app engagement. Methods: Data from users who met the inclusion criteria were collected retrospectively from the medicalmotion app between January 1, 2020, and June 30, 2023. The intervention involved the use of the medicalmotion app, which provides 3‐5 personalized exercises for each session based on individual user data. The primary outcomes assessed pain intensity and well-being using the numeric rating scale (NRS) and the Likert scale. Data were collected at baseline (t0), 4 weeks (t1), and 8 weeks (t2). The correlation between exercise frequency, pain intensity, and well-being was analyzed as a secondary outcome. In addition, average session length and frequency were measured to determine app engagement. Statistical analysis included ANOVA and Spearman correlation analysis. Results: The study included 379 participants with a mean age of 50.96 (SD 12.22) years. At t2, there was a significant reduction of 1.78 points on the NRS (P<.001). The score on the Likert scale for well-being improved by 3.11 points after 8 weeks. Pain intensity showed a negative correlation with the number of daily exercises performed at t1 and t2. Well-being had a small negative correlation with the average number of exercises performed per day. The average number of exercises performed per day was 3.58. The average session length was approximately 10 minutes, and the average interaction with the app was 49.2% (n=27.6 days) of the 56 available days. Conclusions: Overall, the study demonstrates that an app-based intervention program can substantially reduce pain intensity and increase well-being in patients with spinal pain. This retrospective study showed that an app that digitizes multidisciplinary rehabilitation for the self-management of spinal pain significantly reduced user-reported pain intensity in a preselected population of app users.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".