MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W6946306646 · doi:10.26190/unsworks/28784

Exploring physical activity as a potential intervention to address the health consequences associated with gender-based violence.

2024· dissertation· en· W6946306646 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff

Notice bibliographique

RevueUNSWorks (University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia) · 2024
Typedissertation
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueSex and Gender in Healthcare
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésIntervention (counseling)Physical activityMental healthPreparednessHealth promotionPublic healthOccupational safety and healthAlternative medicineSedentary lifestyle

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

One-third of women globally will experience Gender Based Violence (GBV) in their lifetime. GBV is a risk factor for noncommunicable diseases including post-traumatic stress disorder, depression, anxiety, chronic pain and cardiovascular disease. Noncommunicable diseases are associated with physical inactivity, which can further exacerbate mental health symptoms and cardiometabolic risk. Physical activity may therefore be an important target for intervention to improve health outcomes among people who experience GBV. Health professionals, including exercise professionals, are likely to encounter people who experience GBV as part of routine practice, yet their readiness to respond appropriately is unknown. This thesis aimed to i) determine whether individuals who have experienced GBV engage in different levels of physical activity and/or sedentary behaviour compared to individuals who have not been exposed to GBV; and ii) determine preparedness of exercise physiologists, physiotherapists and other allied health professionals (AHPs) to respond to and support a person who has experienced GBV. Chapter Two was a systematic review to explore aim (i). Electronic databases were searched from inception until May 2023. Eligible studies were original research publications that reported a quantitative measure on physical activity and/or sedentary behaviour in a group of people who have experienced any form of GBV as well as a comparator group with people who had not experienced GBV. A total of 856 studies were identified in database searches of PubMed, Embase, PSYCinfo, SPORTDiscus and CINAHL. From screening, 11 eligible studies were identified. Most studies were conducted in the United States (n=9, 82%) and most participant groups were exclusively female (n=9, 82%). The most common form of GBV measured in studies was Intimate Partner violence (n=5, 45%). Five studies reported that individuals who had experienced GBV engaged in lower levels of physical activity compared to those without a history of GBV. However, results were mixed, and the overall evidence did not support our hypothesis, that people who have experienced GBV engage in less physical activity compared to people who have not been exposed to GBV. No studies examined levels of sedentary behaviour. The overall quality of studies was poor, indicated by risk of bias and study quality scores, with 55% (n=6) of studies rated as fair and 45% (n=5) rated as poor quality based on the Newcastle Ottawa Scale. No studies used validated tools to measure levels of physical activity and inconsistent across studies precluding pooling and statistical analysis. Chapter Three was a mixed-methods study to explore aim (ii). Study advertisement was posted to social media with a link to an online survey, as well as researchers’ contact details for participants to volunteer to participate in an interview. The modified Physician Readiness to Manage Intimate Partner Violence Survey (PREMIS) survey was used to assess AHPs perceived preparation, knowledge, opinions and practice issues. Qualitative interviews with AHPs were also conducted to explore understanding of participants’ readiness to identify and respond to GBV. In total, n=105 participants completed the modified PREMIS. Most participants were female (n=78, 74%), from Australia (n=95, 90%) and exercise physiologists (n=43, 41%). Most (80%) of the sample had received one hour or less of GBV training. Mean preparedness scores were low among respondents for perceived preparation (2.79 out of 7) and perceived knowledge (2.68 out of 7). Qualitative interviews were subsequently conducted with n=10 AHPs. Thematic analysis identified four themes: knowledge, lack of confidence, seeking GBV training and clarification of AHPs role. Individuals who experience GBV may have lower physical activity levels compared to individuals not exposed to GBV, however more research with validated tools to accurately determine physical activity and sedentary behaviour levels of people who have experienced GBV is needed. Despite recognition of the importance and agreement of the relevance to AHPs practice, this workforce felt underprepared, had low perceived knowledge and lacked confidence to respond to and support people who have experienced GBV. More research is needed to understand the complex bidirectional relationship between experiencing GBV and physical activity and to further clarify the role of exercise and other allied health professionals’ in supporting people who experience GBV.

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 machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,003
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Qualitatif · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,008
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,028

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0030,008
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,003
Bibliométrie0,0020,002
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0020,001
Science ouverte0,0010,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0020,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0080,001

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.

Tête enseignante Opus0,232
Tête enseignante GPT0,361
Écart entre enseignants0,130 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_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 découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeQualitatif
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2024
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueUNSWorks (University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia)Même sujetSex and Gender in HealthcareTravaux en français237 207