A Longitudinal Examination of the Social-Ecological Correlates of Exercise in Men and Women Following Cardiac Rehabilitation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cardiac patients who engage in ≥150 min of moderate- to vigorous-intensity physical activity (MVPA)/week have lower mortality, yet MVPA declines even following cardiac rehabilitation (CR), and is lower in women. A randomized trial of nine socioecological theory-based exercise facilitation contacts over 50 weeks versus usual care (1:1 parallel arms) was undertaken (NCT01658683). The tertiary objective, as presented in this paper, was to test whether the intervention impacted socioecological elements, and in turn their association with MVPA. The 449 participants wore an accelerometer and completed questionnaires post-CR, and 26, 52 and 78 weeks later. At 52 weeks, exercise task self-efficacy was significantly greater in the intervention arm (p = 0.01), but no other differences were observed except more encouragement from other cardiac patients at 26 weeks (favoring controls). Among women adherent to the intervention, the group in whom the intervention was proven effective, physical activity (PA) intentions at 26 weeks were significantly greater in the intervention arm (p = 0.04), with no other differences. There were some differences in socioecological elements associated with MVPA by arm. There were also some differences by sex, with MVPA more often associated with exercise benefits/barriers in men, versus with working and the physical environment in 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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".