MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2624800236

Women's experiences with the barriers and facilitators to physical activity throughout the course of pregnancy

2011· article· en· W2624800236 on OpenAlexaff
Erica Bennett, Carolyn E. McEwen, Laura Hurd Clarke, Peter R.E. Crocker

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGestational Diabetes Research and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMiscarriagePregnancyPhysical activityPsychologyInterpretative phenomenological analysisThird trimesterMedicineDevelopmental psychologyQualitative researchClinical psychologyPhysical therapyGestation
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Physical activity levels adopted during pregnancy can impact future exercise behaviours post partum, resulting in long term physiological and psychological effects (Hausenblas et al., 2008). The purpose of this study was to qualitatively examine women's perceptions of change in barriers and facilitators of physical activity during pregnancy. Nine previously active expecting women participated in a series of two semi-structured interviews in early second trimester and mid to late third trimester. Data was analyzed using interpretative phenomenological analysis. Results revealed that barriers to physical activity changed throughout pregnancy. Commonly identified barriers during the first and second trimester included fear of miscarriage, nausea/vomiting, fatigue, and weather, while changes in the body, fear of injury, pain and discomfort, and work demands were prominent in the third trimester. Despite these barriers, participants were motivated to engage in physical activity throughout pregnancy to maintain physical fitness, health of the baby and themselves, and to relieve stress. Physical activity behaviours were supported by the participants' partners; however, the majority of participants sought out prenatal exercise classes to create a social network with other expecting mothers. The need to examine pregnant women's experiences with physical activity from a holistic approach beyond the biomedical model will be discussed.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.289 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGestational Diabetes Research and Management→French-language works237,207→