MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2019936342 · doi:10.1177/1524839914532812

Religious Involvement and Health-Related Behaviors Among Black Seventh-Day Adventists in Canada

2014· article· en· W2019936342 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Monica M. McKenzie, Naomi Modeste, Helen Hopp Marshak, Colwick Wilson

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Promotion Practice · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReligion, Spirituality, and Psychology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersShandong Academy of Sciences
KeywordsSeventh day adventistMedicinePhysical activityGerontologyDemographyMultivariate analysisFamily medicineTraditional medicinePhysical therapyTheologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Most studies that involve Black Seventh-Day Adventists (SDAs) have been conducted in the United States. We sought to examine the association between religious involvement and lifestyle practices among Black SDAs in Canada. METHOD: A convenience sample of 509 Black SDA church members 18 years and older completed a self-administered questionnaire, assessing religious involvement and seven lifestyle practices promoted by the SDA church: diet, physical activity, water intake, exposure to sunlight, alcohol use, caffeine and tobacco use, and rest. RESULTS: Compliance with lifestyle practices ranged from a low of 10% meeting fitness guidelines to a high of 99% abstaining from tobacco products. Religious involvement and lifestyle were positively related (rs = .11, p < .05). Multivariate analyses indicated that private religious practice (β = .16, p =.003), importance of the health principles (β = .17, p = .003), and acceptance of health principles (β = .65, p = .00001) significantly predicted the number of behaviors practiced. CONCLUSION: Greater religious involvement is associated with positive lifestyle practices but is not an independent predictor of lifestyle practices for Black Canadian SDAs.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.078

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.345 · 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

Citations26
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealth Promotion PracticeSame topicReligion, Spirituality, and PsychologyFrench-language works237,207