Benefits and Barriers to Exercise among Individuals with Class III Obesity
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: In this paper, we describe the degree of exercise and sedentary behavior among individuals with class III obesity, identify perceived benefits and barriers to exercise, and discuss the association of exercise barriers with activity and sedentary behavior. Methods: This was a cross-sectional study at a tertiary care center. Adults with class III obesity referred to the Bariatric Program completed the exercise benefits/barriers scale, the International Physical Activity Questionnaire Short-Form, and the Sedentary Behavior Questionnaire. Participants were asked to list additional exercise barriers. Results: The 80 participants engaged in a median of 699.0 MET-minutes/week of physical activity, and were sedentary 10.4 ± 4.5 hours/day. The mean exercise benefits/barriers score was 126.3 ± 12.8 (barrier score = 31.6 ± 5.3, benefit score = 87.8 ± 9.4). Less than 60% identified exercise as enjoyable, or a form of social interaction. More than 60% identified exercise barriers related to physical exertion. Additional barriers included pain and musculoskeletal comorbidities (39.4%), psychological factors (14.7%), and weight (12.6%). There was no statistically significant association between exercise barriers and sedentary behavior (p = .69) or physical activity (p = .08). Conclusions: Participants reported low physical activity, with high sedentary behavior and exercise barriers. Physical exertion, pain and musculoskeletal comorbidities were common barriers, which highlights importance of thoughtful exercise with attention to exercise barriers in this population .
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.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
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 it