Mission Impossible? Physical Activity Programming for Individuals Experiencing Homelessness
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: A pilot study was conducted to describe the physical activity experiences and perceived benefits of and barriers to physical activity participation for patrons of a homeless shelter. The resulting pilot data may be used to inform the creation of and support for physical activity and sport programs for those experiencing homelessness. METHOD: Eighteen male patrons of a homeless shelter completed self-report questionnaires to assess psychosocial factors: global self-esteem, general self-efficacy, exercise intention and attitudes, and quality of life. Fitness tests were completed to determine participants' body mass index, cardiorespiratory fitness, flexibility, and general body strength. Interviews probed participants' social support, motivations, perceived benefits, and preferences related to physical activity. RESULTS: Participants scored far below the acceptable range on the sit-and-reach test of flexibility. There were moderate correlations between several of the psychosocial variables and some of the fitness parameters. CONCLUSIONS: The participants could benefit from initiating a varied exercise program to increase their flexibility. Future research should explore intervention on psychosocial variables that may influence other psychosocial variables as well as fitness parameters. Despite limitations of a small sample size and limited access to fitness facilities, the preliminary evidence suggests that patrons of a homeless shelter are open to physical activity experiences and that the benefits may go beyond improving physical fitness 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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".