Investigating intermediary variables in the physical activity and quality of life relationship in persons with spinal cord injury.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Leisure time physical activity (LTPA) has been consistently associated with quality of life (QOL) in people with spinal cord injury (SCI). However, recent research suggests that intermediary variables account for the LTPA-QOL relationship in other populations. Using a prospective design, this study examined potential intermediary constructs linking LTPA and QOL in people with SCI. Drawing from previous literature, a longitudinal structural equation model was developed and tested to determine if depression, functional independence, social integration/participation, and self-efficacy mediate the LTPA-QOL relationship. METHOD: Participants (n = 395) were adults with SCI who reported engaging in at least some LTPA over an 18-month period. LTPA was assessed at baseline, the intermediary variables of depression, functional independence, social integration/participation and self-efficacy were measured at 6-months, and QOL was evaluated at 18-months. RESULTS: The structural model had minimally acceptable fit [χ²(395) = 803.16, p > .05; CFI = .90, RMSEA = .05 and SRMR = .06]. Baseline LTPA was related to functional independence (β = .20, p > .05), depression (β = -.32, p > .05) and self-efficacy (β = .60, p > .05) at 6 months. Six-month functional independence (β = .15, p > .05), social participation (β = .21, p > .05) and depression (β = -.34, p > .05) significantly predicted 18-month QOL. Only functional independence and depression were significant mediators. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that LTPA may improve QOL in adults with SCI through its influence on functional independence and depression.
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".