MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1968389448 · doi:10.1037/a0021220

Étude exploratoire des attitudes envers l'activité physique chez les sujets souffrant d'un trouble panique.

2010· article· fr· W1968389448 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Louis Vaillancourt, C. Bélanger

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Behavioural Science/Revue canadienne des sciences du comportement · 2010
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldPsychology
TopicAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La presente etude porte sur l'exploration des attitudes et des comportements des sujets aux prises avec un trouble panique avec et sans agoraphobie (TP/A) a l'egard de la pratique d'activites physiques. Afin de mener cette etude a terme, 141 sujets souffrant de TP/A sont compares a 172 sujets temoins. Parmi ces sujets, certains presentent un trouble actuel (n = 73) et d'autres un trouble en remission (n = 68). Les resultats indiquent que les sujets TP/A, actuels et en remission, sont davantage portes a craindre certaines sensations physiques issues de la pratique d'activites physiques, plus particulierement la tachycardie, les vertiges et les bouffees de chaleur. Ces sujets ont aussi tendance a craindre le fait que ces symptomes puissent engendrer des consequences negatives. De plus, comparativement aux sujets du groupe temoin, les sujets TP/A ressentent moins de plaisir et de facilite a pratiquer des activites physiques de nature aerobique. Les sujets TP/A asymptomatiques pourraient presenter un style cognitif propre a maintenir une vulnerabilite pouvant favoriser des episodes de rechute. Des recommandations pour le traitement du TP/A sont suggerees.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.118
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.193 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Behavioural Science/Revue canadienne des sciences du comportementSame topicAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesFrench-language works237,207