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), preventative efforts to minimize costs associated with condition diagnosis are a public health priority. Cues to action are specific internal (e.g., physical symptoms, family member with a condition) or external stimuli (e.g., public service announcements, health education campaigns) that are necessary to trigger appropriate health behaviours and serve to create an awareness of the health threat (Mattson, 1999). To date, limited understanding of the scope of influence cues to action have on health beliefs and behaviour associated with osteoporosis is known. The present investigation was designed to address this gap in the literature. More specifically, the influence of cues to action, a public service announcement (PSA) developed by Osteoporosis Canada and a bone screening by way of Quantitative Ultrasound, on health beliefs and health-enhancing physical activity (HEPA) across a four week period was investigated. Peri-and postmenopausal women (N= 174) were randomly assigned to one of three conditions 1) an osteoporosis public service announcement (PSA) condition; 2) a bone screening condition via quantitative ultrasound techniques, and 3) a PSA attention control condition. Health beliefs associated with osteoporosis were taken at three time points: prior to the cue to action intervention, immediately following the intervention, and four weeks post intervention. Knowledge of osteorporosis risk factors and HEP A were assessed pre and post-intervention only. Results of a regression analysis suggested that baseline health beliefs predicted baseline HEPA (R2 adj = .24; F (9, 161) = 6.49,p = .000; 95% CI = .12 - .35) with exercise barriers (p = -.33) being a negative predictor and health motivation (p = .21) being a positive predictor of HEP A. Baseline health beliefs predicted With incidence rates of osteoporosis increasing (Osteoporosis Canada, 2007), preventative efforts to minimize costs associated with condition diagnosis are a public health priority. Cues to action are specific internal (e.g., physical symptoms, family member with a condition) or external stimuli (e.g., public service announcements, health education campaigns) that are necessary to trigger appropriate health behaviours and serve to create an awareness of the health threat (Mattson, 1999). To date, limited understanding of the scope of influence cues to action have on health beliefs and behaviour associated with osteoporosis is known. The present investigation was designed to address this gap in the literature. More specifically, the influence of cues to action, a public service announcement (PSA) developed by Osteoporosis Canada and a bone screening by way of Quantitative Ultrasound, on health beliefs and health-enhancing physical activity (HEPA) across a four week period was investigated. Peri-and postmenopausal women (N= 174) were randomly assigned to one of three conditions 1) an osteoporosis public service announcement (PSA) condition; 2) a bone screening condition via quantitative ultrasound techniques, and 3) a PSA attention control condition. Health beliefs associated with osteoporosis were taken at three time points: prior to the cue to action intervention, immediately following the intervention, and four weeks post intervention. Knowledge of osteorporosis risk factors and HEP A were assessed pre and post-intervention only. Results of a regression analysis suggested that baseline health beliefs predicted baseline HEPA (R2 adj = .24; F (9, 161) = 6.49,p = .000; 95% CI = .12 - .35) with exercise barriers (p = -.33) being a negative predictor and health motivation (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 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 | 0.003 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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 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".