Cues to action : do they result in belief and behavioural change in women?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".