Exploring variability and perceptions of lifestyle physical activity among individuals with severe and enduring mental health problems: A qualitative study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: While individuals with severe and enduring mental illness (SEMI) may be more sedentary than the general population little is known about what influences physical activity broadly (not just structured programmes) and how best to develop effective community-based interventions.Aims: The purpose of this qualitative study was to examine the idiographic determinants of community-based lifestyle physical activity to inform the design of interventions among people with SEMI.Methods: Sixteen individuals with SEMI, attending a community support centre, participated in semi-structured interviews focusing on past and present behavioural assessment, knowledge and attitudes, and sources of support to be physically active.Results: Among the more active individuals, walking was part of a regular routine, involving considerable distances. Overall, most were ambivalent about becoming more active, receiving little or no support to do more. A complex variety of environmental, personal and psycho-social factors interacted to influence behaviour.Discussion: Individuals with SEMI are receptive toward receiving more support to be physically active and in increasing their levels of physical activity. Physical activity interventions that address ambivalence, alleviate concerns regarding social evaluation, and target increases in walking need development and evaluation.Declaration of interest: None.
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 | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".