Exploring the impact of physical activity-related weight stigma among women with self-identified 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
Weight stigma contributes to negative health and health inequity. For women with obesity, weight stigma is prevalent in their everyday lives, including in the context of physical activity. Our current understanding of physical activity-related weight stigma is limited, and in-depth research is needed to promote inclusive and stigma-free physical activity. The purpose of this study was to understand how women with obesity experience, respond to, and perceive physical activity-related weight stigma. Sixteen women (aged 20–59 years) participated in semi-structured telephone interviews. Using Interpretive Description, a practice-based form of qualitative inquiry, we found that women’s experiences of physical activity-related weight stigma reflected structural, public, and self-stigma. These experiences included stigmatising comments and treatment, lack of appropriate and affordable clothing options, inaccessible exercise equipment, and weight-centric physical activity messages. In response, the women recounted feeling negative emotions (e.g. shame, sadness, guilt, anger) and had a heightened anticipation of stigma. They used self-protection techniques, attempted to change their body, and occasionally acted in resistance to socially held weight-related beliefs. Weight stigma impacted the women’s lives in a myriad of ways, which included viewing physical activity as a lose-lose situation and as a means to an end (i.e. for weight loss). For some women who reported resisting weight stigma, physical activity began to be uncoupled from body weight. The findings have implications for shifting physical activity promotion and practices to be more inclusive of women with obesity.
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 | 0.016 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| 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