The Chronic Illness Context and Change in Exercise Self-Care Among Older Adults: A Longitudinal Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT This study examines the stages of change in exercise as a form of coping with chronic illness, among a panel of older adults managing arthritis, cardiovascular disease, or hypertension. Hypotheses connected to socio-demographic, exercise-history, cognitive, and illness contexts are explored in order to advance applications of the Transtheoretical Model for exercise self-care. A random sample of 735 individuals aged 51 to 95, who completed interviews at time 1 (1995–96) and time 2 (1996–97), were drawn from the Vancouver North Shore Self Care Study. Bivariate and hierarchical logistic regression analyses were performed on the data. The descriptive analyses supported two patterns: first, older persons with a chronic illness exhibited a propensity either to remain in or move into the extreme exercise stages (pre-contemplation or maintenance) in a non-sequential manner; second, elements of the illness context were primary determinants of stage of exercise change. Illness type, illness duration, activity restriction, and co-morbidity exhibited associations with exercise-stage change in the multivariate analysis. The findings have a number of direct implications for tailoring health promotion programs targetting older adults, especially those who use exercise as a form of self-care.
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 | 0.005 |
| 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".