Cues to action : do they result in belief and behavioural change in women?
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
With incidence rates of osteoporosis increasing (Osteoporosis Canada, 2007), \npreventative efforts to minimize costs associated with condition diagnosis are a public \nhealth priority. Cues to action are specific internal (e.g., physical symptoms, family \nmember with a condition) or external stimuli (e.g., public service announcements, health \neducation campaigns) that are necessary to trigger appropriate health behaviours and \nserve to create an awareness of the health threat (Mattson, 1999). To date, limited \nunderstanding of the scope of influence cues to action have on health beliefs and \nbehaviour associated with osteoporosis is known. The present investigation was designed \nto address this gap in the literature. More specifically, the influence of cues to action, a \npublic service announcement (PSA) developed by Osteoporosis Canada and a bone \nscreening by way of Quantitative Ultrasound, on health beliefs and health-enhancing \nphysical activity (HEPA) across a four week period was investigated. Peri-and postmenopausal \nwomen (N= 174) were randomly assigned to one of three conditions 1) an \nosteoporosis public service announcement (PSA) condition; 2) a bone screening \ncondition via quantitative ultrasound techniques, and 3) a PSA attention control \ncondition. Health beliefs associated with osteoporosis were taken at three time points: \nprior to the cue to action intervention, immediately following the intervention, and four \nweeks post intervention. Knowledge of osteorporosis risk factors and HEP A were \nassessed pre and post-intervention only. Results of a regression analysis suggested that \nbaseline health beliefs predicted baseline HEPA (R2 \nadj = .24; F (9, 161) = 6.49,p = .000; \n95% CI = .12 - .35) with exercise barriers (p = -.33) being a negative predictor and health \nmotivation (p = .21) being a positive predictor of HEP A. Baseline health beliefs predicted With incidence rates of osteoporosis increasing (Osteoporosis Canada, 2007), \npreventative efforts to minimize costs associated with condition diagnosis are a public \nhealth priority. Cues to action are specific internal (e.g., physical symptoms, family \nmember with a condition) or external stimuli (e.g., public service announcements, health \neducation campaigns) that are necessary to trigger appropriate health behaviours and \nserve to create an awareness of the health threat (Mattson, 1999). To date, limited \nunderstanding of the scope of influence cues to action have on health beliefs and \nbehaviour associated with osteoporosis is known. The present investigation was designed \nto address this gap in the literature. More specifically, the influence of cues to action, a \npublic service announcement (PSA) developed by Osteoporosis Canada and a bone \nscreening by way of Quantitative Ultrasound, on health beliefs and health-enhancing \nphysical activity (HEPA) across a four week period was investigated. Peri-and postmenopausal \nwomen (N= 174) were randomly assigned to one of three conditions 1) an \nosteoporosis public service announcement (PSA) condition; 2) a bone screening \ncondition via quantitative ultrasound techniques, and 3) a PSA attention control \ncondition. Health beliefs associated with osteoporosis were taken at three time points: \nprior to the cue to action intervention, immediately following the intervention, and four \nweeks post intervention. Knowledge of osteorporosis risk factors and HEP A were \nassessed pre and post-intervention only. Results of a regression analysis suggested that \nbaseline health beliefs predicted baseline HEPA (R2 \nadj = .24; F (9, 161) = 6.49,p = .000; \n95% CI = .12 - .35) with exercise barriers (p = -.33) being a negative predictor and health \nmotivation (p = .21) being a positive predictor of HEP A. Baseline health beliefs predicted
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».