Perception and Beliefs Regarding Cardiovascular Risk Factors and Lifestyle Modifications Among High-Risk College Students
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Studying risk factors and corresponding behavior in young adults is important as atherosclerotic plaque begins to form in early adulthood, resulting in cardiovascular disease (CVD) later in life. The purpose of this study was to explore the perceptions and beliefs regarding cardiovascular risk and lifestyle modification among high-risk college students (based on Framingham 30-year risk score). METHODS: Semistructured qualitative interviews were conducted and analyzed using qualitative content analysis. RESULTS: Risk factors included overweight/obesity, alcohol consumption, elevated blood pressure, family history, and smoking. Qualitative interviews revealed six themes: (a) recognizing risk, (b) lifestyle trajectories, (c) factors influencing lifestyles, (d) ideal healthy lifestyle modifications, (e) perceived benefits of healthy lifestyles, and (f) integrating technology and health apps. Participants demonstrated a lack of understanding of how the various factors contributed to CV risk. Influencing factors to a healthy lifestyle were categorized as environmental, relational, financial, work/life/school balance, and internal/intrinsic motivation. CONCLUSIONS: Understanding high-risk college students' beliefs and perceptions regarding CVD risk factors and lifestyle modification is the first step to assessing the problem facilitating early intervention in the young adult population. Clinicians should assess, develop, and implement risk reduction programs that are tailored to individuals who need it the most, those at high risk.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".