The effects of previous educational training on physical activity counselling and exercise prescription practices among physicians across Nova Scotia: a cross-sectional study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Physicians (MDs) report difficulty including physical activity (PA) and exercise (PAE) as part of routine care. MDs who report previous educational training in PAE may prescribe exercise more frequently. We evaluated the effects of previous training on perceptions and practices of PA counselling and exercise prescriptions among MDs in Nova Scotia. METHODS: MDs (n=174) across Nova Scotia completed an online self-reflection survey regarding their current PAE practices. MDs who reported previous training (n=41) were compared to those who reported no training (n=133). RESULTS: Trained-MDs were 22% more confident performing PA counselling than untrained-MDs (p<0.005). In patient appointments, trained-MDs included PAE more often (51% vs 39%; p=0.03) but trained-MDs and untrained-MDs had similar rates of exercise prescriptions (12%; p>0.05). The most impactful barriers (on a scale of 1 to 4) were lack of time (2.5) and perceived patient interest (2.4), which were unaffected by previous training (p>0.05). CONCLUSION: Previous training was associated with a higher confidence to include PAE discussions with patients by MDs in Nova Scotia, but had minimal influence on their many barriers that prevent exercise prescription. Although some training supports MDs inclusion of PAE into their practice, there is a need for greater, more intensive educational training to assist MDs in prescribing exercise.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".