MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Impact of Hockey Fans in Training Program on Steps and Self-rated Health in Overweight Men

2016· article· en· W2511471539 on OpenAlexaffabout
Dawn P. Gill, Ashleigh De Cruz, Brendan Riggin, Stephanie Muise, Roseanne Pulford, Cassandra Bartol, Kate Hunt, Sally Wyke, Cindy M. Gray, Christopher Bunn, Shaun Treweek, Merrick Zwarenstein, Guangyong Zou, Karen Danylchuk, Robert J. Petrella

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPhysical Activity and Health
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPedometerPhysical therapyOverweightRandomized controlled trialBody mass indexMoodMedicinePsychosocialClubPsychologyPhysical activityClinical psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Football Fans in Training (FFIT) is an effective, gender-sensitized, weight loss and healthy living program for overweight/obese men, delivered via professional football clubs. Hockey Fans in Training (Hockey FIT) is a new program adapted from FFIT for Canadian hockey. PURPOSE: To examine the impact of Hockey FIT on steps, self-esteem, mood, and self-rated health, 12 weeks after baseline (post program). METHODS: 80 male fans [35-65 years; body mass index (BMI) ≥ 28 kg/m2] of 2 Ontario Junior A hockey clubs were randomized to either intervention (Hockey FIT) or comparator (wait-list control), within a pilot, pragmatic randomized controlled trial (RCT). Hockey FIT involved 12 weekly, 90-minute group sessions delivered by trained coaches using club facilities. Each session combined classroom material, including evidence-based behaviour change techniques (e.g., self-monitoring, goal setting) and healthy eating advice (e.g., reducing portion size), with physical activity sessions. Prescriptive exercise (e.g., individualized target heart rates and pedometer-based incremental step targets) was incorporated throughout. We examined between-group differences in mean steps/day (7-day pedometer monitoring), self-esteem (Rosenberg scale), positive and negative affect (I-PANAS-SF scale), and self-rated health (EQ-5D-3L VAS score) using linear mixed effects regression models that accounted for club and age. RESULTS: Groups were similar at baseline [median (interquartile range): age: 48.0 (17.0) years; BMI: 35.1 (6.3) kg/m2]. 75% of men in the intervention group attended ≥ 6 sessions. At 12 weeks, the intervention group increased their daily steps to a greater extent than the comparator [difference between groups in mean change: 3127 (95% confidence interval: 1882 to 4372) steps/day, p <0.001]. The intervention group also improved their self-rated health (scale 0 to 100; 100 = best) to a greater extent than the comparator [difference between groups in mean change: 7.0 (2.1 to 11.9) points, p = 0.005]. There were no differences between groups in self-esteem or positive/negative affect post program. CONCLUSION: Hockey FIT has the potential to help overweight/obese men increase their physical activity levels and improve their self-rated health. Long-term follow-up and a full-scale pragmatic RCT is warranted.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.332 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise→Same topicPhysical Activity and Health→French-language works237,207→