Cultural influences on physical activity and exercise beliefs in patients with chronic kidney disease: ‘The Culture-CKD Study’—a qualitative study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: This study used a mixed-method approach to explore cultural and ethnic influences on the perception of, and decision to engage with or not to engage with, physical activity and exercise therapy in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). DESIGN: Qualitative research was conducted through the use of semistructured interviews and focus groups. Self-reported physical activity levels were measured using the General Practice Physical Activity Questionnaire (GPPAQ), and self-efficacy for exercise with Bandura's Self-Efficacy for Exercise Scale. SETTING: This study was conducted in a non-clinical setting of a single National Health Service Hospital Trust between April 2018 and July 2019. PARTICIPANTS: Participants >18 years of age with a diagnosis of CKD, from black African, black Caribbean, South Asian or white ethnicity were eligible for the study. 84 patients with a diagnosis of CKD (stages 2-5), aged 25-79 (mean age 57) were recruited. Semistructured interviews (n=20) and six single-sex, ethnic-specific focus group discussions were undertaken (n=36). OUTCOMES: Primary outcome was to explore the perceptions, attitudes and values about exercise and physical activity in different ethnic groups through qualitative interviews, analysed using an inductive thematic analysis approach. Questionnaires were analysed using Pearson correlation to determine if there was a significant relationship between the self-efficacy and GPPAQ levels. RESULTS: =-0.40, p=0.001). CONCLUSION: Understanding the cultural, attitudes and beliefs of individuals with CKD from a variety of ethnic backgrounds is complex. Understanding of patients' experiences, thoughts and beliefs may be of relevance to clinicians when designing CKD exercise services. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03709212; Pre-results.
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 | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".