MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2008894215 · doi:10.1080/07399330802484621

Negotiating Participation: How Women Living With Disabilities Address Barriers to Exercise

2009· article· en· W2008894215 on OpenAlexaff
Danielle Rolfe, Karen Yoshida, Rebecca Renwick, Carrie A. Bailey

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Care For Women International · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInjury Epidemiology and Prevention
Canadian institutionsToronto Rehabilitation InstituteUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNegotiationAffect (linguistics)GerontologyPsychologyMedicineSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Exercise participation among women living with disabilities can be limited as a result of pain, decreased muscle strength, and limited mobility. More "disabling" than these symptoms, however, is a lack of accessible exercise facilities in women's communities. Our study explores how material and social structures and functions existing and operating within women's communities and at community-based exercise facilities affect their participation. Interviews with 15 women living with disabilities were conducted and qualitatively analyzed. Participants discuss the benefits of their exercise participation, in addition to how they experience and negotiate structural and attitudinal barriers within community-based facilities.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.245
Threshold uncertainty score0.438

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.343 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations27
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealth Care For Women InternationalSame topicInjury Epidemiology and PreventionFrench-language works237,207