Psychotic Disorders, Eating Habits, and Physical Activity: Who Is Ready for Lifestyle Changes?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Significant weight gain is a serious side effect of many antipsychotic medications, yet successful strategies for significant weight loss are lacking. The transtheoretical model for weight management can be used to identify people who are ready to change (contemplation-preparation group) their eating habits and physical activity. This study compared characteristics of patients in Canada who had a psychotic disorder and were ready to make lifestyle changes with characteristics of patients who were not considering lifestyle changes. METHODS: Participants were surveyed to determine their stages of change for eating habits and physical activity, and various characteristics were measured, including body mass index, body image, nutritional intake, and level of physical activity. RESULTS: A total of 101 participants (64 men) (mean+/-SD age 35+/-11 years) were taking antipsychotic medications. Seventy-one percent had schizophrenia spectrum disorders, and 15% had affective psychosis. The prevalence of patients identified as being ready for change was higher than expected: 68% for eating habits and 54% for physical activity. Participants who were ready to change eating habits were also ready to change physical activity habits (p<.04). Stages of change for eating habits were associated with body mass index (p<.004), whereas stages of change for physical activity were associated with self-reported vigorous (p<.001) and moderate (p<.005) physical activity but not mild physical activity. CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians may help patients develop healthier eating and physical activity habits by using the transtheoretical model, because it identifies patients who are ready to change to healthier lifestyle strategies and may help patients with antipsychotic-induced weight gain.
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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".