MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2762866596

The CHANGE program: Comparing an interactive coaching approach with a prescriptive lifestyle treatment for obesity on self-efficacy and motivation for health behaviour change

2014· article· en· W2762866596 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCoaching Methods and Impact
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityLakehead University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMotivational interviewingCoachingCompetence (human resources)OverweightObesitySelf-efficacyMedicineHealth coachingRandomized controlled trialBehavior changePhysical therapyRepeated measures designPsychologyPhysical activityGerontologyIntervention (counseling)NursingSocial psychology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Obesity is an escalating epidemic and modifiable risk factor for a myriad of chronic conditions.  Studies incorporating Motivational Interviewing via Co-Active Life Coaching (MI-via-CALC) have elicited positive results among adults with obesity; however there is a paucity of MI-obesity research that includes sufficient statistical power and a validated comparison group. The purpose of the CHANGE (Coaching towards Healthy Actions Naturally through Goal-related Empowerment) Program was to compare MI-via-CALC to a gold-standard obesity intervention. Undergraduate students were randomized to a 12-week: (a) personalized MI-via-CALC program whereby a certified coach worked with participants to achieve goals through dialogue; or (b) prescriptive education-based lifestyle treatment following the LEARN Program for Weight Management.  A parallel group randomized trial design was used to compare task self-efficacy for health behaviour change (i.e., physical activity and nutrition), and relative autonomy/competence for behaving in a healthy way, between the two conditions during the intervention and after a six-month follow-up period.  Seventy-eight students with a BMI > 30kg/m2 were enrolled. Those who completed their 12-week intervention and one follow-up assessment were included in the analyses (n = 45). Separate repeated-measures ANOVAs were conducted for each variable.  No significant differences were found between groups; however, a significant time effect was observed for task self-efficacy for overcoming barriers to physical activity (p < .05) and healthy eating (p = .01), as well as perceived competence to maintain a healthy body weight (p < .001), with changes occurring primarily during the intervention period (p < .01). It appears that MI-via-CALC compares favourably with LEARN as an obesity treatment in relation to improving task self-efficacy and competence for maintaining a healthy weight. Given the integral role that these variables play regarding the initiation and maintenance of health behaviour change, the unique contributions of each approach should be considered when working with this population.Acknowledgments: This study was funded through the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.820
Threshold uncertainty score0.565

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.202
GPT teacher head0.432
Teacher spread0.231 · 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

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCoaching Methods and ImpactFrench-language works237,207