Assessing the impact of Motivational-Interviewing via Co-active Life Coaching on engagement in physical activity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this 12-week pre-post design study was to assess the impact of Motivational Interviewing via Co-Active Life Coaching (MI-via-CALC) on engagement in physical activity for 25 women between the ages of 30 and 55 years. Data on task self-efficacy, barrier-specific self-efficacy, self-esteem, physical activity (PA), body mass index (BMI), and waist-to-tip ratio and circumference were collected. Results indicated some positive, but not significant differences in barrier-specific self-efficacy, which were detected between pre- and post- intervention, and statistically significant differences in self-esteem between pre- and post-intervention were found. No statistically significant differences were found in participants’ task self-efficacy scores and PA scores. Statistically significant decreases were detected for BMI, and waist-to-hip ratios and circumference. MI-via-CALC is an encouraging approach for women who are seeking a more physically active lifestyle, and additional research with a larger sample size is recommended.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".