Gastroenterologist and Patient Attitudes Toward Yoga as a Therapy for Irritable Bowel Syndrome: An Application of the Theory of Planned Behaviour
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Objectives To identify irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) patients’ attitudes, subjective norms, perceived control and intention to practice yoga and gastroenterologists’ attitudes and current yoga recommendations for their patients with IBS. Methods Gastroenterologists and IBS patients completed online surveys including Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) constructs. Among IBS patients, multiple linear regression determined the multivariate associations between TPB variables and intention to practice yoga while controlling for significant socio-demographic variables. Gastroenterologists were asked about their attitudes and current yoga recommendations for patients with IBS. Chi-square analyses examined associations between gastroenterologists’ demographics and recommending yoga. Binomial logistic regression described associations between attitude variables and current yoga recommendations. Results For patients (n = 109), controllability (β = 0.5, P < 0.001), affective attitude (β = 0.4, P < 0.05) and self-efficacy (β = 0.3, P < 0.05) were significantly associated with intention to do yoga in the regression model. TPB variables explained 34% of the variance in patients’ intentions to practice yoga. The binomial regression analysis revealed that gastroenterologists (n = 79) who have confidence in recommending yoga (39%) were seven times more likely to recommend it (odds ratio = 7.3, P = 0.002) and those who agreed yoga improves IBS symptom severity (54%) were 10 times more likely to recommend yoga (odds ratio = 10.1, P < 0.001). Most (86%) wanted more evidence to support efficacy of yoga for IBS and 44% asked for more knowledge on how to refer a patient. Conclusion Controllability, affective attitude and self-efficacy predicted IBS patients’ intentions to practice yoga. Although gastroenterologists believed yoga is safe and beneficial for IBS patients, most do not recommend yoga due to lack of confidence and scientific evidence.
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 | 0.004 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".