Disseminating education to solid organ transplant recipients to promote engagement in physical activity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate the dissemination of education through a workshop to promote engagement in physical activity (PA) among solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients. Methods: The in-person workshop consisted of expert-led lectures on topics related to physical activity (day 1) and sports and fitness training with volunteer coaches (day 2). There were separate streams for children/adolescents and adults. RE-AIM (Reach, Efficacy, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance) framework was used to evaluate the impact of the workshop. Presenters and participants completed evaluations of the workshop using a 5-point Likert scale. A subgroup of adults completed a self-reported PA questionnaire at baseline and 4-weeks after the workshop. Results: = 0.16) in PA. However, 56% of SOT recipients reported changing their level of PA. Conclusion: An educational-workshop with hands-on training was an efficient and well-received method for disseminating awareness about the benefits of PA in SOT recipients. Innovation: Dissemination of evidence-based knowledge through a novel educational-workshop in a real-world setting has the potential to inform the decisions about PA behavior among SOT recipients.
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 | 0.012 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".