Pattern, preferences, barriers, and correlates of self-reported physical activity in adults with borderline personality disorder: An online survey in western countries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Borderline personality disorder (BPD) is characterized by an instability of self-image, interpersonal relationships, and emotions and is highly comorbid with other disorders. Physical activity has shown great results in treating these disorders. Physical activity intervention should be built considering the preferences and barriers of the targeted individuals. However, to this day no study analyzed the preferences and barriers to physical activity in individuals with BPD, which is the goal of this study. We used an online survey to question 192 adults with a self-reported diagnosis of BPD from Canada, France, the United States, England, Switzerland, and New Zealand. Participants complete 607 minutes of physical activity weekly on average. They prefer walking (66.7%), biking (33.3%), aquatic activities (29.0%), and running (24.2%). Their main barriers to physical activity are having a friend over, having other engagements, and recovering from an injury. They also prefer doing individual supervised physical activity outside and in a long session of moderate intensity. Finally, a majority of participants are interested in receiving physical activity advice, but most did not. The professionals from whom they would prefer to receive advice are trainers, psychiatrists, physical therapists, and psychologists. These results are important to better tailor future physical activity interventions for adults with BPD.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".