MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2787865013 · doi:10.1186/s40359-018-0213-8

Believability of messages about preventing breast cancer and heart disease through physical activity

2018· article· en· W2787865013 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Psychology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicBehavioral Health and Interventions
Canadian institutionsLaurentian UniversityUniversity of Alberta
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchCanada Research ChairsHeart and Stroke Foundation of Canada
KeywordsBreast cancerPsychologyHeart diseaseDiseaseConfidence intervalPhysical therapyCancerMedicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this research was to examine the relationships of self-reported physical activity to involvement with messages that discuss the prevention of heart disease and breast cancer through physical activity, the explicit believability of the messages, and agreement (or disagreement) with specific statements about the messages or disease beliefs in general. METHODS: A within subjects' design was used. Participants (N = 96) read either a breast cancer or heart disease message first, then completed a corresponding task that measured agreement or disagreement and confidence in the agreement or disagreement that 1) physical activity 'reduces risk/does not reduce risk' of breast cancer or heart disease, 2) that breast cancer or heart disease is a 'real/not real risk for me', 3) that women who get breast cancer or heart disease are 'like/not like me', and 4) that women who get breast cancer or heart disease are 'to blame/not to blame'. This task was followed by a questionnaire measuring message involvement and explicit believability. They then read the other disease messages and completed the corresponding agreement and confidence task and questionnaire measures. Lastly, participants completed a questionnaire measuring physical activity related attitudes and intentions, and demographics. RESULTS: There was no difference in message involvement or explicit believability of breast cancer compared to heart disease messages. Active participants had a higher confidence in their agreement that physical activity is preventive of heart disease compared to breast cancer. Multinomial regression models showed that, in addition to physical activity related attitudes and intentions, agreement that physical activity was preventive of heart disease and that women with heart disease are 'like me' were predictors of being more active compared to inactive. In the breast cancer model only attitudes and intentions predicted physical activity group. CONCLUSIONS: Active women likely internalized messages about heart disease prevention through physical activity, making the prevention messages more readily available within memory, and active women may therefore process such information differently. The study of how health-related beliefs are created and are related to perceptions of prevention messages is a rich area of study that may contribute to more effective health promotion.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.061
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.097
GPT teacher head0.494
Teacher spread0.397 · 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