Physical activity, self-efficacy and perceptions of illness in adolescents with chronic musculoskeletal disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) is essential for growth, well-being and reducing cardio-metabolic risk. Promoting activity in adolescent disease groups requires understanding of baseline behaviour. Aims: Survey MVPA of adolescents attending a regional rheumatology clinic and identify associations been health beliefs and self-efficacy measures that may explain MVPA behaviour. Method: Three validated questionnaires covering physical activity, sedentary behaviour, self-efficacy to overcome barriers to activity and illness perceptions, were distributed over six consecutive clinics. Results: Questionnaires were completed by 42 patients [mean age 15 (range 11–21) years; 25 with JIA and 26 females]. Activity profiles: 17% inactive (zero days 60 min MVPA), 36% low-active (1–2 days 60 min MVPA), 33% moderately active (3–4 days 60 min MVPA) 14% active (>5 days 60 min MVPA). Sedentary profile: 55% report 4 or more h daily TV viewing and digital recreation. Illness-perception responses: 1 in 3 report severe symptoms, restricted lives and limited activity, 1 in 2 report negative emotional well-being. Positive illness perceptions for illness duration, concern, understanding and emotional response tended towards significant for being active (P = 0.054–0.073). MVPA self-efficacy responses did not correlate significantly with activity. The majority were confident overcoming harassment and physical environment barriers and somewhat confident overcoming internal, social and symptom barriers. TV viewing (OR 0.18 P = 0.05) and being on a sports teams (OR 9.7 P = 0.01) are strong correlates of inactivity/activity. Reporting lots of opportunity for activity positively correlated with MVPA (r = 0.5, P = 0.03).
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".