Barriers to Physical Activity Among Patients With Type 1 Diabetes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine, in an adult population with type 1 diabetes, barriers to regular physical activity using a diabetes-specific barriers measure (the Barriers to Physical Activity in Diabetes [type 1] [BAPAD1] scale) and factors associated with these barriers. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: One hundred adults with type 1 diabetes answered a questionnaire assessing perceived barriers to physical activity and related factors. A1C was obtained from the medical chart of each individual. RESULTS: Fear of hypoglycemia was identified as being the strongest barrier to physical activity. Greater knowledge about insulin pharmacokinetics and using appropriate approaches to minimize exercise-induced hypoglycemia were factors associated with fewer perceived barriers. Greater barriers were positively correlated with A1C levels (r = 0.203; P = 0.042) and negatively with well-being (r = -0.45; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Fear of hypoglycemia is the strongest barrier to regular physical activity in adults with type 1 diabetes, who should therefore be informed and supported in hypoglycemia management.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".