Maintenance and decline of physical activity during adolescence: insights from a qualitative study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Better knowledge on why some individuals succeed in maintaining participation in physical activity throughout adolescence is needed to guide the development of effective interventions to increase and then maintain physical activity levels. Despite allowing an in-depth understanding, qualitative designs have infrequently been used to study physical activity maintenance. We explored factors contributing to the maintenance and the decline of physical activity during adolescence. METHODS: Questionnaires were administered to 515 grade 10-12 students. The Physical Activity Questionnaire for Adolescents was used to determine physical activity level at the end of adolescence. An adapted version of this questionnaire was used to estimate physical activity in early adolescence. Among both genders, we identified participants who maintained a high level of physical activity since grade 7 and some whose activity level declined. For each category, groups of 10 students were randomly selected to take part in focus group discussions. RESULTS: Seven focus groups with 5 to 8 participants in each were held. Both maintainers and decliners associated physical activity with positive health outcomes. Maintenance of physical activity was associated with supportive social environments and heightened feelings of competence and attractiveness. A decline in physical activity was associated with negative social validation, poor social support and barriers related to access. CONCLUSIONS: Although maintainers and decliners associate physical activity with similar themes, the experiences of both groups differ substantially with regards to those themes. Taking both perspectives in consideration could help improve interventions to increase and maintain physical activity levels of adolescents.
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) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".