Facilitators and Barriers to Being Physically Active in a Rural Hawaiʻi Community: A Photovoice Perspective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A large body of existing literature suggests associations between perceptions of the environment and physical activity status, but very few studies have examined perceptions among Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander (NHPI) communities. The purpose of this study was to examine perceptions of the active living environment in Hawai'i in rural communities with a high proportion of NHPI. A total of thirteen adults were purposefully selected to participate in the study, and the Photovoice method was used to capture their perceptions. Three sessions were used to describe the purpose of the study, select and describe photographs, and identify emerging themes. A total of nine overarching themes were identified by participants and placed into three categories. Participants identified facilitators to being physically active, but also identified several barriers in their community such as the lack of available physical and built amenities, social norms, and safety. Participants proposed four action items to improve their active living environment: promote programs that are organized by community members, contact the local university to provide access to physical activity equipment, contact Honolulu City & County officials to voice concerns regarding barriers that prevent physical activity in the community, and working with employers in the community to create policies that promote physical activity at the workplace.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".