A multilevel modeling approach to examining the implementation-effectiveness relationship of a behavior change intervention for health care professional trainees
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Changing Minds, Changing Lives, a seminar-mediated behavior change intervention, aims to enhance health care professionals' (HCPs') social cognitions for discussing leisure-time physical activity (LTPA) with patients with physical disabilities. This study examines which seminar implementation variables (presenter characteristics, delivery components) predict effectiveness using multilevel modeling. HCP trainees (n = 564) attended 24 seminars and completed Theory of Planned Behavior-based measures for discussing LTPA at pre-, post-, 1-month post-, and 6-months post-seminar. Implementation variables were extracted from presenter-completed questionnaires/checklists. Seminars presented by a HCP predicted positive changes in all cognitions pre-post but negative changes in attitudes and perceived behavioral control (PBC) over follow-up (ps < .05). The number of seminars the presenter had delivered predicted negative changes in attitudes and PBC during follow-up (ps < .001). Inclusion of audiovisual components predicted positive changes in attitudes pre-post (p < .001). Presenter characteristics may be "key ingredients" to educational interventions for HCPs; however, future studies should examine additional implementation variables.
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.
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 | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 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 it