Registered Dietitians’ Knowledge, Attitudes, and Behaviour Related to Physical Activity and Sedentariness
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: To explore knowledge, attitudes, and behaviour related to physical activity (PA) and sedentariness among registered dietitians (RDs) in family health teams in Ontario. Methods: This cross-sectional, descriptive study utilized a semi-structured interview guide to conduct qualitative interviews with 20 RDs. Self-administered questionnaires were used to assess personal PA (short version of the International Physical Activity Questionnaire) and sedentary behaviour (Sedentary Behavior Questionnaire). Results: Thematic analysis indicated that, in general, participants had good knowledge of PA and sedentariness. They were knowledgeable about the PA guidelines. They had positive attitudes toward PA and nonsedentariness, stating that both are important in the prevention and treatment of chronic conditions. Quantitative analysis indicated they had moderate-to-high PA levels and were fairly sedentary. Conclusions: This study supports the position that RDs can serve as excellent role models for PA. Though participants had basic knowledge, RDs may benefit from additional education regarding PA and sedentariness when counselling.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".