Accumulation of behavioral validation evidence for physical activity stage of change.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to accumulate behavioral validity evidence for physical activity Stage of Change (SOC). DESIGN: Nine studies used a common physical activity SOC measure and examined self-report, objective, and performance physical activity indicators to accumulate behavioral validity evidence for SOC. Type of measure, the strength of the expected relationship between the measure and SOC, and the predicted SOC differences were examined. Validity evidence for the SOC was also examined by population and sampling method. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Validity evidence for physical activity SOC was classified with respect to the type of measurement instrument and the hypothesized magnitude of the relationship between the measure and the SOC. RESULTS: Physical activity SOC was found to be behaviorally valid as evidenced by self-reported physical activity, self-reported exercise, self-reported sedentary behaviors, pedometers, and physical functioning. Physical activity SOC does not appear to be related to physical fitness or weight indicators. CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights a successful multi-site collaboration. Physical activity data from nine large-scale, health trials was combined and accumulated behavioral validation evidence for the physical activity SOC.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".