A step in the right direction? Understanding the impact of nordic walking on adults living with Parkinson's disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Adults with Parkinson's Disease (PD) who engage in regular physical activity can experience delayed disease progression, minimized symptoms, and improved quality of life. Whereas some activities pose challenges for adults with PD, Nordic walking is one form of physical activity that can help them reach their health goals. In this study, we aimed to explore the experiences of adults with PD who participated in a Nordic walking program, including the perceived impact of the program on their motivation for physical activity and quality of life. Methods: We conducted semi-structured interviews with eight adults with PD who completed 4 weeks of unsupervised Nordic walking. Results: Using thematic analysis, we developed five themes that reflected participants' experiences and the impact of the Nordic walking program. The themes include: participants' perceptions of the program as a catalyst for change in physical activity; improved mental and physical health was viewed as being a direct benefit of the program; participants became more self-aware of their physical abilities; though the program offered flexibility, consideration of structured, group-based programs appears important to pursue. Conclusions: Results support the use of Nordic walking that prioritize group-based, structured sessions over individual, unstructured sessions for adults with PD. Additionally, results suggest that participation in a short Nordic walking program may lead to positive outcomes including increased motivation and physical activity behaviour, improved quality of life, and heightened self-confidence.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".