MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3025830008 · doi:10.1080/09638288.2020.1757167

From guidelines to practice: development and implementation of disability-specific physical activity guidelines

2020· article· en· W3025830008 on OpenAlexafffund
Kathleen A. Martin Ginis, Christopher R. West

Bibliographic record

VenueDisability and Rehabilitation · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpinal Cord Injury Research
Canadian institutionsInternational Collaboration On Repair DiscoveriesUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsPsychological interventionGuidelinePromotion (chess)Intervention (counseling)RehabilitationInclusion (mineral)PsychologyPhysical activityMedicineNursingPhysical therapySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Among people with physical disabilities, one of the most frequently-cited barriers to physical activity participation is a lack of basic information on what to do. Likewise, rehabilitation professionals often cite a lack of knowledge about what to recommend or prescribe, as their primary reason for not promoting physical activity to clients with disabilities. The development and implementation of disability-specific physical activity guidelines are important steps toward addressing informational barriers. This paper describes the reasoning behind disability-specific physical activity guidelines, the gold-standard process used to develop disability-specific guidelines for people with spinal cord injury and multiple sclerosis, and the "who, what, and how" of behavioural interventions and messaging to support people with disabilities in achieving physical activity guidelines. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Not Applicable. RESULTS: Not Applicable. CONCLUSIONS: The needs, values and preferences of people with disabilities must be taken into consideration when undertaking a disability-specific guideline development process. Guidelines can play an important role in physical activity promotion, but behavioural and other interventions are required to address the myriad physical activity barriers faced by people with disabilities.Implications for RehabilitationPeople with and without disabilities can achieve significant fitness and health benefits from activity well below the WHO's 150 minutes/week guideline.Disability-specific physical activity guidelines can alleviate informational barriers for people who want to get active and rehabilitation professionals who want to promote physical activity.Behavioural and other interventions are needed to support people's efforts to achieve physical activity guidelines.A physiotherapist-delivered intervention has shown promise for increasing physical activity in adults with a physical disability.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.208
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.372
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.208
Threshold uncertainty score0.977

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.2080.372
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0070.005
Science and technology studies0.0040.004
Scholarly communication0.0100.011
Open science0.0080.013
Research integrity0.0070.013
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.005

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.

Opus teacher head0.117
GPT teacher head0.487
Teacher spread0.370 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations20
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDisability and RehabilitationSame topicSpinal Cord Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207