Examining the Feasibility and Effects of a Pilot Online Physical Activity Intervention Targeting Social Cognitive Variables in Youth with Physical Disabilities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the feasibility, and short- and longer-term effects of a four-week social cognitive theory-based online physical activity (PA) intervention on the social cognitions and PA behaviour of youth with physical disabilities. Intervention feasibility was supported by high implementation fidelity (100%), high compliance (95.32%), and positive ratings on indicators of acceptability. A series of one-way, repeated measures ANOVAs revealed significant: (a) small-to-medium-sized increases in participants’ task (F[2, 11] = 5.89, η2p = .28) and barrier (F[2, 11] = 4.66, η2p = .24) self-efficacy; (b) large-sized increases in the use of goal-setting (F[2, 11] = 11.01, η2p = .42), and scheduling and planning (F[2, 11] = 10.66, η2p = .42); and (c) a medium-sized increase in PA behaviour (F[2, 11] = 5.32, η2p = .26). Key study implications and contributions to a growing field of research on technology-based PA interventions for youth are discussed.
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 | 0.005 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".