Effects of The Coach Approach Intervention on Adherence to Exercise in Obese Women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The link between physical activity and weight loss has precipitated interest in interventions to foster adherence to exercise. It has been suggested that treatment effects, when significant, should be analyzed to determine theory-based mediators. This research assessed possible mediation of changes in Physical Self-Concept, Exercise Self-Efficacy, Total Mood Disturbance, and Body Areas Satisfaction scores on the relationship between exercise session attendance and participation by obese women in a 6-month treatment based on tenets ofsocial cognitive theory (n=73) or a control condition (n=64). Participation in the treatment was associated with significantly greater exercise session attendance and significantly greater improvements in Physical Self-Concept, Exercise Barriers Self Efficacy, and Body Areas Satisfaction. Overall, changes in the assessed psychological factors demonstrated significant mediation of the association between group membership and exercise session attendance, R2 = .23, with only change in Physical Self-Concept scores providing a significant unique contribution. Extensions of this research across different sample types, and with longer durations, were suggested to refine theory and, ultimately, improve exercise adherence treatments.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".