Is being an autonomy-supportive cam provider related to clients sustaining physical activity?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) users are more physically active than the average Canadian. CAM includes therapy practices (e.g., acupuncture, chiropractic) not considered a regular part of primary healthcare. One reason for these higher rates of physical activity (PA) may be related to the autonomy supportive style used by many CAM practitioners. Using Deci and Ryan's Self-Determination Theory (SDT), we explored the relationship between the perceived autonomy-supportive style of CAM providers and clients' PA. Canadian CAM users (N = 227, M age = 23.4, 84% female) completed an online survey. Path analysis was used to explore the relationships in the hypothesized model. Participants perceived that autonomy-supportive practitioners provided patient-centred care. Perception of care was related to clients' views of being coached to maintain their PA by providers and coaching and motivation were positively related to clients' current engagement in PA. The hypothesized model fit the data (? 2 (5, N = 227) = 12.06, p Acknowledgments: Supported by SSHRC Canada Research Chair Provincial Award
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 | 0.003 | 0.023 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".