MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Group‐Mediated Cognitive‐Behavioral intervention for Increasing Adherence to Physical Activity in Older Adults1

2000· article· en· W2080026715 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 · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPhysical Activity and Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysical activityIntervention (counseling)Physical therapyRandomized controlled trialCognitionMedicinePsychologyActivities of daily livingGerontologyPsychiatryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examined the efficacy of a group‐mediated cognitive behavioral intervention (GMCB) on adherence rates to physically active lifestyles in older adults. Sixty older adults were randomized to I of 3 groups: waiting list control (WLC), a standard physical activity program (SPA), or GMCB. The SPA and GMCB involved 6 months of combined center‐ and home‐based activity. Contact with participants was then terminated with a follow‐up assessment at 9 months. Results revealed that, at the 9‐month follow‐up the GMCB group had a higher frequency of weekly physical activity than the SPA group. At 6 months, both groups were more active, had higher aerobic power, and improved HRQL when compared with the control group.

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)0.002
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 score0.851
Threshold uncertainty score0.623

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.210
GPT teacher head0.510
Teacher spread0.300 · 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