Exploring Beliefs About Exercise Among Pregnant Women in Rural Communities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Women who are pregnant in rural communities are disproportionally impacted by obesity and sedentary behavior, and this could be related to having negative beliefs about exercise during pregnancy, leading to inactivity. The purpose of this study was to identify self-reported beliefs about exercise among pregnant women in a rural community. METHODS: Pregnant participants (N = 70) between 8 and 16 weeks' gestation were recruited from an obstetric clinic serving a rural population. An open-ended questionnaire addressing beliefs about exercise and based on the constructs of the theory of planned behavior was administered. Descriptive survey results were analyzed by calculating means and frequencies. Open-ended responses were assessed by inductive content analysis. RESULTS: Commonly reported advantages of exercise during pregnancy included improved perinatal health outcomes and weight management. Commonly reported disadvantages included an increase in fatigue and concerns for maternal and fetal safety. Common facilitators of exercise included access to resources, free time or a decrease in demands from work, and support systems including family and friends. Common barriers to exercise included a lack of time, physical changes including feelings of nausea and fatigue, and lack of access to resources. DISCUSSION: This study was the first to report beliefs about exercise during pregnancy in a rural setting. Responses in the current study suggest potential gaps in knowledge of evidence-based information regarding physical activity during pregnancy. Beliefs as well as reported barriers and facilitators of physical activity during pregnancy were similar those reported in other populations. In addition, access to resources (or lack of) appears to be an important facilitator (or barrier) among women in rural settings; thus, developing strategies designed to overcome this barrier, specifically in rural areas, is critically important. Future intervention strategies need to be tailored specifically to the needs of women living in rural areas.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".