Leisure-time physical activity in individuals with osteoporosis : associations with psychological well-being
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With approximately 16% of the Canadian population living with osteoporosis, \nand rates expected to increase (Osteoporosis Canada, 2009), cost-effective treatment \nmodalities that improve bone health and psychological well-being reflect an important \npublic health agenda. Physical activity has been implicated as one non-pharmaceutical \nmechanism to help improve psychological well-being in the general population (Fox, \nStathi, McKenna, & Davis, 2007) and in people diagnosed with osteoporosis \n(Osteoporosis Canada, 2007). The purpose of this investigation was to determine the \nassociation between leisure-time physical activity (LTP A) and well-being in people \ndiagnosed with osteoporosis. A secondary purpose, using Basic Needs Theory (BNT; \nDeci & Ryan, 2002) was to determine if the fulfillment of three psychological needs (i.e., \ncompetence, autonomy and relatedness) mediated the relationship between LTP A and \nwell-being. People diagnosed with osteoporosis (N= 190; Mage = 68.14; SDage = 11.54) \nwere asked to complete a battery of questionnaires assessing L TP A, hedonic and \neudaimonic well-being and perceived psychological need satisfaction in physical activity \ncontexts. Bivariate correlations revealed a pattern of negligible (r's -0.02 to 0.35) to small \ncorrelations between LTP A and well-being with contextual positive affect (r = 0.24) and \nsubjective vitality (r = 0.22) demonstrating statistical significance (p < .01). Results of \nthe multiple mediation analysis indicated that perceived satisfaction of the three \npsychological needs mediated the relationship between LTPA and well-being with \nperceived competence emerging as a unique mediator. As such, LTP A was positively \nassociated with well-being in people who are diagnosed with osteoporosis, and the \nfulfillment of the three psychological needs may be the mechanism through which this \n111 \neffect is carried. Health promotion specialists and practitioners should encourage patients \nwith osteoporosis to engage in LTP A, and support their needs for competence, autonomy \nand relatedness. Practical implications for researchers and health promotion specialists \nare discussed in terms ofthe results of this investigation.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".