Evaluating the effects of behavior change training on the knowledge, confidence and skills of sport and exercise science students
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Behavior change interventions have the potential to have a transformative effect on the health of populations. Allied health professionals have a key role to play in delivering these interventions. However, traditionally undergraduate allied health professional programs have not had a behavior change focus. The aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness of a training program on sport and exercise science students' knowledge, confidence and skills in the provision of behavior change support. METHOD: A mixed method convergent design was used to address the research question. Fifteen sport and exercise science students took part in a training program consisting of seven 90-min weekly face to face group sessions. Student satisfaction with training methods was assessed. Pre-to-post training changes in students' confidence and knowledge in the provision of behavior change support was evaluated. Delivery of behavior change support was assessed by an audio recorded role-play rated by an expert using the Health Care Climate Questionnaire, and an adapted version of the Communication Evaluation in Rehabilitation Tool. Students also completed a reflective assignment. RESULTS: Students were satisfied with the training. There were increases in students' confidence and knowledge of certain behavior change components post-training but not behavior change techniques. Students delivered behavior change support in a broadly needs supportive manner. The reflective assignment showed that students found particular behavior change strategies difficult to implement. CONCLUSION: It is feasible to train undergraduate students in particular components of behavior change support. Academic institutions should embed behavior change training into the allied health professional curriculum to ensure graduates are job ready with the knowledge, confidence and skills to support health related behavior change within the wider health system.
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.005 |
| 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 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".