CHARACTERISTICS OF LONG-TERM COMPLIERS TO HOME-BASED RESISTANCE TRAINING IN CARDIAC PATIENTS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To identify factors that influence long-term compliance to home-based resistance training (RT) in cardiac patients. METHODS: A questionnaire was distributed to 518 patients (447M, 71F) who had participated in the Toronto Rehab's RT programme between February, 1994, and February, 2000. Chi-square analysis was used to analyze the data. RESULTS: Three hundred and fifty-eight patients returned surveys (316 M, 42 F), 69% of the total sample. The mean follow-up time was 38.7 ± 25.9 months. Of those patients, 178 (160M, 18F) were continuing RT at the time of the survey (patients referred to as compliers), and 180 (156M, 24F) had discontinued RT (dropouts). One hundred and fourteen of the dropouts had continued for a mean of 5.6 ± 6.4 months(late dropouts). The patients in each of these groups differed significantly in some characteristics. Compliers were more likely to have a greater level of support from families/friends (p < 0.005), and from family physicians/cardiologists (p < 0.0005) than the dropouts. Dropouts had a higher percentage of body fat (p < 0.025) than the compliers. The compliers were more likely to have carried out RT both at a fitness club and at home; more of the late dropouts carried out RT at home only (p < 0.005). A greater proportion of the compliers increased the weight lifted and/or repetitions in the home-based phase compared to the late dropouts (p < 0.005). The compliers were also more likely to perform a warm-up prior to RT, as compared to the late dropouts (p < 0.05). Finally, more of the compliers believed that RT had a positive effect on their ability to perform day to day activities (p < 0.005); compared to the late dropouts who did not perceive RT to have this same benefit. The main reasons cited by patients for participation was to improve appearance, improve performance of tasks at home, and enhance self-image and confidence. The reasons given for discontinuing RT included lack of motivation, not enough time, and laziness. Reasons varied depending on gender and time to non-compliance. CONCLUSION: Factors that appear to increase long-term compliance include the following: support from family, friends, and physicians; a lower percentage of body fat; working out both at a fitness club and at home; increasing the weight lifted and/or repetition; warming up; and a perceived benefit from RT on activities of daily living.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".