Physical activity behaviors and attitudes among women with an eating disorder: a qualitative study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Physical activity (PA) is an integral part of healthcare for the general population and individuals with psychiatric disorders. However, PA is significantly more complex for and related to both healthy (e.g., reduced anxiety and depressive symptoms) and unhealthy outcomes (e.g., intrusive, repetitive thoughts that lead to abnormally high levels of PA) among women with an eating disorder (ED). Consequently, many healthcare professionals recommend abstinence from PA during ED treatment. Despite this, women may remain engaged in PA during ED treatment or resume PA shortly thereafter. Little has been done to understand women's PA behaviors and attitudes and to explore how they integrate PA into their lives during and after ED treatment. Thus, this study sought to explore PA behaviors and attitudes among women with an ED. METHODS: Nine women who self-reported receiving an ED diagnosis participated in semi-structured interviews, which were transcribed and analysed thematically. RESULTS: Six interrelated themes were constructed to represent participants' PA experiences: PA as a lifestyle, PA can be beneficial, How I feel when I can't do PA, Being cautious about PA, Reactions to healthcare professionals' practice of recommending abstinence from PA during ED treatment, and PA programming thoughts. CONCLUSIONS: Overcoming dysfunctional PA behaviors (e.g., engaging in abnormally high levels of PA) and attitudes (e.g., associating PA with caloric expenditure) can be a long and complicated journey for women with an ED. Nevertheless, women with an ED want PA to be integrated into their ED treatment protocol for two key reasons, namely to accrue the benefits associated with PA and to learn how to engage in PA in adaptive and healthy ways.
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 | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".