Gendered perceptions of osteoporosis: implications for youth prevention programs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The presentation of osteoporosis as a woman's disease in prevention information influences how osteoporosis is perceived and how prevention information is internalized and applied. Using the Health Belief Model as a framework, gendered perceptions of osteoporosis were investigated in Canadian young adults to inform the design of prevention programs. A combination of the Osteoporosis Health Belief Scale (OHBS) and semi-structured interviews were used to explore participants' perceptions of osteoporosis severity, susceptibility, and motivation to engage in prevention activities. Sixty multiethnic men and women aged 17-30 years living in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada participated in the study. While the findings from the OHBS indicated that both genders scored high for self-efficacy, the results from the qualitative interviews showed ambivalent attitudes toward prevention behaviors, indicating a disconnect between quantitative and qualitative findings. Perceptions related to severity and susceptibility revealed that while osteoporosis was generally viewed as a woman's disease, perceived individual risk of disease was a negotiation between larger gender constructs of osteoporosis and a variety of risk factors. This study indicates that osteoporosis prevention programs should consider actively acknowledging gendered and youth-based conceptions of osteoporosis in order to increase prevention behaviors in the whole population to reduce future disease.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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".