Difficulties Experienced in Setting and Achieving Goals by Participants of a Falls Prevention Programme: A Mixed-Methods Evaluation
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
PURPOSE: To evaluate the ability of participants of a falls prevention programme to set and achieve goals. METHODS: The study used a prospective longitudinal design and a mixed-methods approach to data collection. Study participants were (1) 220 older adults participating in a 15-week combined exercise and education falls prevention programme and (2) 9 practitioners (3 home-care nurses, 5 community workers, and an exercise physiologist) involved in delivering the programme. Data from goal-setting forms were analyzed, and descriptive statistics were used to determine the number of appropriate goals set and achieved. Data were analyzed according to programme setting (home- or group-based) and whether or not participants were classified as being from a Culturally and Linguistically Diverse (CALD) background in the Australian context. Semi-structured interviews with programme practitioners were thematically analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 144 respondents (n=75 CALD group, n=41 non-CALD group, n=6 CALD home, n=22 non-CALD home) set 178 goals. Only 101 (57%) goals could be evaluated according to achievement, because participants set goals that focused on health state instead of behaviour, set goals not relevant to falls prevention, used inappropriate constructs to measure goal achievement, and either did not review their goals or dropped out of the programme before goal review. Of these 101 goals, 64 were achieved. Practitioners described their own difficulties in understanding the process of setting health behaviour goals along with communication, cultural, and logistic difficulties. CONCLUSIONS: Both CALD and non-CALD participants and those participating in both group- and home-based programmes experienced difficulty in setting and achieving goals to facilitate behaviour change for falls prevention. Data suggest that home-based participants had more difficulty in setting goals than their group-based counterparts and, to a lesser extent, that CALD participants experienced more difficulty in setting goals than their non-CALD counterparts. The use of a guided approach to goal setting and the need for more specific practitioner training and follow-up support regarding goal setting in the context of a falls prevention programme should be considered.
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 | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| 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 ».