Pilot Test of an Attribution Retraining Intervention to Raise Walking Levels in Sedentary Older Adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To pilot test a new behavioral intervention to increase walking in sedentary older adults. DESIGN: Pre-post community-based pilot study. SETTING: Three senior centers in greater Los Angeles. PARTICIPANTS: Forty-six sedentary adults aged 65 and older. INTERVENTION: At four weekly 1-hour group sessions held at the senior centers, a trained health educator applied a theoretically grounded, standardized "attribution retraining" curriculum developed by a multidisciplinary team of investigators. Participants were taught that becoming sedentary is not inevitable with aging and that older adults should attribute being sedentary to modifiable attributes rather than to old age. A 1-hour exercise class including strength, endurance, and flexibility training followed each weekly attribution retraining session. MEASUREMENTS: Change from baseline in steps per week recorded using a digital pedometer was measured after 7 weeks. Age expectations (measured using the Expectations Regarding Aging-38 survey, a previously tested instrument on which higher scores indicate that the participant expects high functioning with aging and lower scores indicate that the participant expects physical and mental decline) and health-related quality of life were measured using in-person interviews. RESULTS: Mean steps per week increased from 24,749 to 30,707, a 24% increase-equivalent to 2.5 miles (2-sided t-test P=.002). Age expectation scores increased 30% (P<.001), and the changes in age expectations and steps per week correlated (correlation coefficient=0.39, P=.01). Participants experienced improved mental health-related quality of life (P=.049) and reported less difficulty with activities of daily living (P=.04). More than 50% of participants reported improvements in pain, energy level, and sleep quality. CONCLUSION: In this small pre-post community-based pilot study, a structured attribution retraining curriculum accompanied by a weekly exercise class was associated with increased walking levels and improved quality of life in sedentary older adults. Attribution retraining deserves further investigation as a potential means of increasing physical activity in sedentary older adults.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".