Participants’ perspectives of a fall prevention exercise program in older Arab Americans: A focus group study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background and objective: Physical exercise is an important intervention to maintain health, reduce falls and improve quality-of-life outcomes in older adults. Falls are the leading cause of fatal and non-fatal injuries, and the use of Tai Chi exercise is well-supported by the general older population. Currently, there is little evidence to support the acceptance of Tai Chi by Arab Americans who have no cultural ties to Tai Chi. It is important to understand the perspective of participants in order to gain insight into the attitudes and opinions of the target group. Purpose: To explore participants' perspectives in a small group setting about the implementation of a culturally sensitive Tai Chi fall prevention group exercise program.Methods: Participants were eight older Arab American women who completed a 12-week Tai Chi fall prevention exercise program at a non-for-profit Arab community center. A semi-structured interview and focus group study was conducted with the participants and was audiotaped. The audio recordings were translated into English, transcribed, and analyzed for emergent themes.Results: Participants’ views of the program were positive. The key elements that contributed to the positive outcomes reported by participants were the characteristics of Tai Chi, the Tai Chi instructor, and the use of bilingual staff as a facilitator. The data showed three themes of self-reported benefits, including prevention awareness, physical benefits and mental health benefits, and two program-related factors: program barriers and promoters.Conclusions: Findings indicated that the Tai Chi program implemented in a culturally sensitive manner can be accepted by older Arab American women. Collaborating with a community-based organization and using bilingual staff from the same culture are key factors to promote the success of the program.
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 | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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".