MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Effects of Message Framing on Exercise Adherence and Health Beliefs Among Patients in a Cardiac Rehabilitation Program

2004· article· en· W2060357558 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Biobehavioral Research · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicBehavioral Health and Interventions
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHealth belief modelRehabilitationPsychologyDiseaseCognitionPopulationHealth educationMedicinePhysical therapyPublic healthPsychiatryNursingInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This experiment examined the effects of framed health education messages on exercise adherence among patients entering a cardiac rehabilitation program, as well as the mediating effects of health‐related cognitions. Patients read gain‐framed, loss‐framed, or no messages about the importance of exercise with regard to heart disease and completed measures of health beliefs using the Health Belief Model (HBM). Over the following 3‐month period, patients in the gain‐framed message condition exercised more than did those in the no message condition. Significant between‐group differences were observed on the HBM constructs of perceived susceptibility to heart disease and barriers to exercise, but these health beliefs did not mediate the effects of the educational messages. The results suggest value in using gain‐framed educational materials in the cardiac population.

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.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.834
Threshold uncertainty score0.424

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.474
Teacher spread0.408 · 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