A Qualitative Exploration of Exercise Among Pulmonary Rehabilitation Participants: Insight From Multiple Sources of Social Influence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Exercise training within the pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) context is considered the most effective strategy to reduce COPD symptoms. However, participation in PR and continued exercise training following program completion are low. Previous research examined factors related to attendance and adherence, but the knowledge base to date has been limited to quantitative findings that focus solely on participants diagnosed with COPD. In addition to quantitative research, exploring multiple perspectives (eg, PR participants, significant others, staff, and stakeholders) using qualitative research methods opens a window of additional understanding. The goal of this study was to obtain multiple perspectives on PR to gain insight into factors that affect exercise participation among individuals diagnosed with COPD. METHODS: A total of 26 participants were interviewed via telephone, including 8 individuals diagnosed with COPD (4 men and 4 women, mean age of 67 [range of 58-77] y), 4 family members, 11 PR staff, and 3 community stakeholders. RESULTS: Analysis revealed 3 themes: task self-efficacy for exercise, provision of support and encouragement, and perceptions of gender differences. Despite initial concerns, individuals diagnosed with COPD reported becoming more confident during PR and emphasized the importance of being supported by staff. PR staff perceived that men tended to approach exercise in a more eager and aggressive manner compared with women, who were more cautious and hesitant. CONCLUSIONS: In addition to enhancing task self-efficacy, findings suggest that exercise participation and adherence within the PR environment may be improved by adopting a gender-tailored approach.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".