An Ecological Exploration of Facilitators to Participation in a Mosque-Based Physical Activity Program for South Asian Muslim Women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This descriptive qualitative study informed by an ecological framework explored factors influencing South Asian Muslim women's decisions to participate in a mosque-based physical activity intervention. METHODS: Individual, face-to-face, semistructured interviews were conducted in English, Hindi, or Urdu with 12 South Asian Muslim women at their home or mosque in Ontario, Canada. All interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and managed, sorted, and analyzed for themes through a process of descriptive analysis. RESULTS: The participants described as follows: (1) intrapersonal facilitators, which included their feelings, beliefs, and motivations to continue with this intervention; (2) interpersonal facilitators detailing the support that they had received from others during the intervention; and (3) environmental facilitators, which highlighted convenience and access to physical activity opportunities in a local community setting. CONCLUSION: This intervention displayed how South Asian Muslim women were motivated to continue with the mosque-based physical activity intervention due to interpersonal, intrapersonal, and environmental facilitators. The findings can be used to increase further understanding of how mosques may provide culturally and religiously sensitive contexts for physical activity interventions for South Asian Muslim women.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".