MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3107741995 · doi:10.1186/s40795-020-00392-1

Registered dietitians’ beliefs and behaviours related to counselling patients on physical activity and sedentary behaviour from a theory of planned behaviour perspective

2020· article· en· W3107741995 on OpenAlex
Jessica Huntington, John J. M. Dwyer, Sara Shama, Paula Brauer

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Nutrition · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPhysical Activity and Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersUniversity of Guelph
KeywordsTheory of planned behaviorMedicineThematic analysisPhysical activityBehaviour changeClinical nutritionQualitative researchMotivational interviewingPerspective (graphical)Scope of practiceFamily medicineHealth carePsychological interventionNursingPhysical therapyControl (management)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Registered dietitians working in team-based primary care settings (e.g., family health teams [FHTs]) are positioned to counsel on physical activity and sedentary behaviour when providing nutrition-related services to promote health and prevent disease. This qualitative study explored FHT registered dietitians' beliefs and behaviours related to counselling patients on physical activity and sedentary behaviour. METHODS: Twenty registered dietitians in FHTs in Ontario, Canada were interviewed in person. Theory of planned behaviour guided the development of this cross-sectional, descriptive study. Thematic analysis was used to identify themes within each of the following theoretical constructs (topics): registered dietitians' behaviour (practice), behavioural intention, attitude, subjective norm, and perceived behavioural control related to physical activity and sedentary behaviour counselling. RESULTS: All participants counselled patients on physical activity, using some motivational interviewing strategies, and most counselled on sedentary behaviour. Many participants intended to continue their current physical activity counselling practices and increase sedentary behaviour counselling. Some participants had a positive attitude about the effectiveness of counselling on physical activity and sedentary behaviour, but their belief about effectiveness was dependent on factors such as time frame for behaviour change. Many participants felt that other health care professionals expected them to counsel on physical activity and they believed that other registered dietitians counsel on physical activity and sedentary behaviour. Facilitators to counselling included FHT dynamics and time with patients. In terms of barriers, almost all participants were confident in basic PA counselling only and contended that only this is within their scope of practice. Many participants posited that exercise prescription is outside their scope of practice. Other barriers included registered dietitians' lack of knowledge and not having a physical activity expert on the team. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that strategies are warranted to improve FHT registered dietitians' knowledge, attitude, and counselling skills related to physical activity and sedentary behaviour. This study provides a strong foundation to develop a theory-based, quantitative measure to assess physical activity and sedentary behaviour counselling practices and determinants among registered dietitians.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.205
Threshold uncertainty score0.711

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.051
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.264 · 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