Incarcerated women develop a nutrition and fitness program: participatory research
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Women in prison throughout the world experience higher rates of mental and physical illness compared with the general population and compared with men in prison. The paper finds no published studies that report on men or women in prison engaging in participatory health research to address their concerns about nutrition and fitness. The purpose of this paper is to describe a pilot nutrition and fitness program, which resulted from a unique prison participatory health research project. DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: Women in prison designed, led, and evaluated a six-week pilot fitness program in a minimum/medium security women's prison. Pre- and post-program assessments included a self-administered questionnaire and body measures. Open-ended questionnaire responses illuminated the quantitative findings. FINDINGS: Sixteen women in prison completed the program evaluation. Weight, body mass index, waist-to-hip ratio, and chest measurements decreased, and energy, sleep, and stress levels improved by the end of the program. RESEARCH LIMITATIONS/IMPLICATIONS: As a component of a participatory research project, incarcerated women designed and led a nutrition and fitness program, which resulted in improved body measures and self-reported health benefits. ORIGINALITY VALUE: Incarceration provides opportunities to engage women in designing their own health programs with consequent potential long-term "healing" benefits.
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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 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".