Summary of international guidelines for physical activity after pregnancy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Postpartum physical activity can improve mood, maintain cardiorespiratory fitness, improve weight control, promote weight loss, and reduce depression and anxiety. This review summarizes current guidelines for postpartum physical activity worldwide. PubMed (MEDLINE) was searched for country-specific government and clinical guidelines on physical activity after pregnancy through the year 2013. Only the most recent guideline was included in the review. An abstraction form facilitated extraction of key details and helped to summarize results. Six guidelines were identified from 5 countries (Australia, Canada, Norway, United Kingdom, and United States). All guidelines were embedded within pregnancy-related physical activity recommendations. All provided physical activity advice related to breastfeeding and 3 remarked about physical activity after cesarean delivery. Recommended physical activities mentioned in the guidelines included aerobic (3/6), pelvic floor exercise (3/6), strengthening (2/6), stretching (2/6), and walking (2/6). None of the guidelines discussed sedentary behavior. The guidelines that were identified lacked specificity for physical activity. Greater clarity in guidelines would be more useful to both practitioners and the women they serve. Postpartum physical activity guidelines have the potential to assist women to initiate or resume physical activity after childbirth so that they can transition to meeting recommended levels of physical activity. Health care providers have a critical role in encouraging women to be active at this time, and the availability of more explicit guidelines may assist them to routinely include physical activity advice in their postpartum care.
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 | 0.009 | 0.027 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.012 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.020 | 0.009 |
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".