The perceived impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on physical activity, health, and lifestyle among adults with physical disabilities living in Canada and the Netherlands
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background The impact of COVID-19 might differ between people with physical disabilities in Canada and the Netherlands due to differences in implemented measures and infection rates. This study aimed to describe and compare the perceived impact of the pandemic on lifestyle and health among adults with physical disabilities in Canada and the Netherlands. Methods Secondary data from two ongoing studies were used: the Canadian COVID-19 Disability Survey and the Dutch Rehabilitation, Sports and Active lifestyle (ReSpAct) 2.0 Study. Self-reported physical activity was measured using the validated questionnaires IPAQ-SF in Canada and A-SQUASH in the Netherlands. Impact of COVID-19 on mental health and lifestyle (diet, smoking, alcohol) was assessed using self-constructed questions. Descriptive and regression analyses were performed. Results Canadian participants (N=292) spent on average 145 minutes (Median=0.00, IQR=120.00) on moderate- and vigorous-intensity activities per week. Dutch participants (N=91) spent on average 1787 minutes (Median=1605.00, IQR=1470.00) on physical activities per week. In both studies, almost half of participants became less physically active since the pandemic (Canada: 47.1%, Netherlands: 42.7%). 94.7% of Canadians experienced (some) negative impact of COVID-19 on mental health, compared to 71.4% of Dutch participants. Overall, Canadians experienced generally greater negative changes in lifestyle than Dutch participants. Conclusion While the findings illustrate Canadians reported a greater negative impact of the pandemic than Dutch participants, they should be interpreted with caution due to the small and potentially selective sample. We illustrate the importance of supporting and promoting physical activity among people with physical disabilities during and after the pandemic. Word count: 249Acknowledgments: The COVID-19 Disability Survey Group includes: Pinder DaSilva, Femke Hoekstra, Cameron Gee, Tara Joy Knibbe, Meagan O'Neill, Adrienne R. Sinden, Joan Ubeda-Colomer and Kathleen A. Martin Ginis. The ReSpAct 2.0 Group includes: Pim Brandenbarg Rienk Dekker, Florentina Hettinga, Trynke Hoekstra, Femke Hoekstra, Leonie Krops, Bregje Seves, and Lucas van der Woude
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".