Exploring the construct validity of the Transtheoretical Model to structure physical activity interventions for individuals with serious mental illness.
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Physical activity intervention research involving individuals with serious mental illness are often not based on any theoretical framework. This study examined the construct validity of the Transtheoretical Model (TTM) in individuals with serious mental illness to guide future physical activity interventions. METHODS: Fifty-four individuals completed surveys that asked about their current stage of change for physical activity, self-efficacy, and perceived advantages and disadvantages of being more physically active. RESULTS: Most individuals reported being in the preparation stage of the TTM. As individuals approached the action and maintenance stages, self-efficacy and perceived benefits of physical activity increased significantly. Although perceived disadvantages decreased with each successive stage, this change was not significant. CONCLUSIONS: This study's findings support the TTM's application in this population to structure physical activity interventions given that self-efficacy, perceived benefits of and barriers to physical activity differed across stages and changes were in the direction predicted by theory.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it