Examining the Individual and Perceived Neighborhood Associations of Leisure-Time Physical Activity in Persons with Spinal Cord Injury
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) constructs have been shown to be useful for explaining leisure-time physical activity (LTPA) in persons with spinal cord injury (SCI). However, other factors not captured by the TPB may also be important predictors of LTPA for this population. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to examine the role of neighborhood perceptions within the context of the TPB for understanding LTPA in persons living with SCI. METHODS: This is a cross-sectional analysis (n = 574) using structural equation modeling involving measures of the TPB constructs, perceived neighborhood esthetics and sidewalks, and LTPA. RESULTS: TPB constructs explained 57% of the variance in intentions and 12% of the variance in behavior. Inclusion of the neighborhood variables to the model resulted in an additional 1% of the variance explained in intentions, with esthetics exhibiting significant positive relationships with the TPB variables. CONCLUSION: Integrating perceived neighborhood esthetics into the TPB framework provides additional understanding of LTPA intentions in persons living with SCI.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".