Best Evidence Summary of Exercise Interventions for Osteoporosis in Postmenopausal Women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Exercise is one of inexpensive and effective interventions for the prevention and treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis, but relevant pieces of evidence are wide-ranging and fragmented, and there is no standardized and comprehensive exercise guidance program on clinic. Objective To screen and assess the evidence of exercise interventions for postmenopausal osteoporosis, then summarize the best pieces. Methods We systematically searched clinical practice guidelines, clinical decisions, evidence summaries, expert consensuses and systematic reviews regarding exercise interventions for postmenopausal osteoporosis in databases of BMJ Best Practice, Up To Date, DynaMed, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, Guidelines International Network, Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network, National Guideline Clearinghouse, webs of Registered Nurses' Association of Ontario, International Osteoporosis Foundation, Royal Osteoporosis Society, National Osteoporosis Foundation, Royal Australian College of General Practitioners, American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, Society of Obstetrics and Gynaecologists of Canada, Medlive, JBI, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, Web of Science, PubMed, Embase, CNKI and SinoMed from inception to January 2022. All relevant evidence was summarized and extracted according to the theme. Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREEⅡ) was used to evaluate the quality of the guidelines, Critical Appraisal for Summaries of Evidence (CASE) was used to evaluate the quality of clinical decisions, the authenticity assessment tool of the expert consensus of the JBI Evidence-Based Health Care Center in Australia (2016 edition) was used to evaluate the quality of expert consensuses, the Australian JBI Evidence-based Health Care Centre System Evaluation Methodology Quality Evaluation Tool (2016 edition) was used to evaluate the quality of the systematic reviews. Results A total of 18 studies were included, including seven guidelines, two clinical decisions, four expert consensuses and five systematic reviews. Twenty-two pieces of evidence were extracted, involving five aspects: pre-exercise assessment, exercise type, exercise intensity and time, health education and precautions. Conclusion This paper extracts the best evidence of exercise intervention for postmenopausal osteoporosis patients from five aspects: pre-exercise assessment, exercise type, exercise intensity and time, health education and precautions. To reduce the risks of falls and fractures and improve quality of life in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis, it is suggested to provide these women with rational exercise guidance developed based on the best evidence.
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 | 0.014 | 0.092 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.009 | 0.011 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.012 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.002 |
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".