Painful Choices: A Qualitative Exploration of Facilitators and Barriers to Active Lifestyles Among Adults With Osteoarthritis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Research has indicated physical activity and exercise can effectively attenuate biopsychosocial osteoarthritis-related symptoms in adults, more so than other management strategies; however, both leisure and structured physical activity are scarcely recommended by health care providers, and remain rarely adopted and adhered to in this patient population. Using qualitative interviews, the present study investigated potential facilitators and barriers to physical activity for adults with osteoarthritis. Fifteen participants (30-85 years of age) with osteoarthritis engaged in semi-structured interviews, which focused on experiences with physical activity/exercise, daily osteoarthritis management, and experiences with health professionals' recommendations. Analysis of the interview transcripts revealed that pain relief, clear health-related communication, and social support facilitated physical activity. Physical pain, psychological distress, and inadequate medical support were the most frequently expressed barriers. The present study supports the biopsychosocial nature of osteoarthritis, which may have important implications for advancing exercise as an effective and long-term intervention strategy in aging adults with osteoarthritis.
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 | 0.011 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".