MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2413516538 · doi:10.1177/1557988315596226

Barriers to Recruiting Men Into Chronic Disease Prevention and Management Programs in Rural Areas

2015· article· en· W2413516538 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Adam Gavarkovs, Shauna M. Burke, Kristen Reilly, Robert J. Petrella

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Men s Health · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender Roles and Identity Studies
Canadian institutionsLawson Health Research InstituteWestern University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicineChronic diseaseGerontologyRural areaDiseaseFocus groupPhysical activityDisease managementNursingFamily medicinePhysical therapyBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Chronic disease is becoming increasingly prevalent in Canada. Many of these diseases could be prevented by adoption of healthy lifestyle habits including physical activity and healthy eating. Men, especially those in rural areas, are disproportionately affected by chronic disease. However, men are often underrepresented in community-based chronic disease prevention and management (CDPM) programs, including those that focus on physical activity and/or healthy eating. The purpose of this study was to explore the experiences and perceptions of program delivery staff regarding the challenges in recruitment and participation of men in physical activity and healthy eating programs in rural communities, and suggestions for improvement. Semistructured interviews were conducted by telephone with 10 CDPM program delivery staff from rural communities in Southwest Ontario, Canada. Time and travel constraints, relying on spouses, and lack of male program leaders were cited as barriers that contributed to low participation levels by men in CDPM programs. Hiring qualified male instructors and engaging spouses were offered as strategies to increase men's participation. The results of this study highlight many of the current issues faced by rural health organizations when offering CDPM programming to men. Health care organizations and program delivery staff can use the recommendations in this report to improve male participation levels.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.802
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.053
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.324 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations20
Published2015
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Men s HealthSame topicGender Roles and Identity StudiesFrench-language works237,207