Participation of Adults with Mental Retardation in a Video- and Leader-Directed Aerobic Dance Program
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose was to compare two conditions (leader-plus-video, video-only) that involved different levels of support on facilitating engagement in moderate to vigorous physical activity (MVPA) in adults with mental retardation (MR). Engagement was examined during 10-min aerobic dance sessions conducted 3 days per week over a 10-week experimental period followed by a 4-week maintenance period. The experimental design was single subject reversal (B-A-B-A). Participants were 17 adults (mean age = 42.6 years) with MR (5 females, 12 males) employed at a sheltered workshop. Visual analysis of graphed data revealed no meaningful difference between leader-plus-video and video-only conditions on MVPA engagement. Over 75% of the participants chose to attend each session over the 10-week experiment. Approximately 60% chose to attend during the 4-week maintenance period. Persons who attended, however, did not necessarily engage in MVPA.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".