Predicting Adherence of Adults to a 12-Month Exercise Intervention
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to (a) examine demographic, psychosocial, and physiological predictors of exercise adherence in a yearlong exercise intervention and (b) describe the trajectory of adherence over time. METHODS: Participants were 51 men and 49 women aged 40 to 75 years. The supervised and home-based intervention consisted of 60 minutes/day, 6 days/ week of moderate-to-vigorous intensity exercise. Three adherence measures were used: (1) minutes/week, (2) MET-hours/week, and (3) change in cardiopulmonary fitness (VO2max). Predictors of adherence were determined separately by sex using mixed models and multivariable regression. RESULTS: Participants performed 287 ± 98 minutes/week of moderate-to-vigorous activity with 71% adhering to at least 80% (288 minutes/week) of the prescription. Men adhered better than women (P < .001). Among women, adiposity-related variables were significantly related to poorer adherence on all 3 measures (P < .05). A less consistent pattern was observed among men but in follow-up analyses, adiposity was associated with fewer MET-hours/week of exercise. Social support, pain, and perceived benefits were predictive in some models. Men and nonobese women experienced peak adherence at 4 to 6 months, while obese women peaked during months 0 to 3. CONCLUSIONS: When provided with supervision and support, previously sedentary men and women can achieve and maintain high levels of aerobic activity.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".