Moving Through COVID-19: Perspectives of Older Adults in the Getting Older Adults Outdoors Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Safety guidelines resulting from the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic may reduce physical activity participation of older adults, particularly prefrail and frail individuals. The objective was to explore older adults' experiences with physical activity during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. Using a qualitative descriptive approach, interviews were conducted with 16 older adults. Data were analyzed thematically. Two themes emerged: (a) coming to a standstill and (b) small steps. Participants described that imposed provincial and federal recommendations caused them to reduce their physical activity with negative consequences. As time progressed, participants used emerging public health knowledge about coronavirus disease 2019 to safely increase physical activity. Many participants developed strategies to remain active during the pandemic (e.g., wearing a pedometer, walking outdoors at particular times of day). Findings from this study can better inform the development of programs, clinical practice, and policy for physical activity promotion in older adults during periods of physical distancing and isolation.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".