MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4309479455 · doi:10.1016/j.mhpa.2022.100485

“You can't take a pill to exercise” – Qualitative findings from the Toward Exercise as Medicine for Adolescents with bipolar disorder (TEAM-BD) study

2022· article· en· W4309479455 on OpenAlexafffund
Diana Khoubaeva, Najla Popel, Danielle Omrin, Jessica Roane, Vanessa Timmins, Erin E. Michalak, Andrew Kcomt, Tera Armel, Suzanne A. Jordan, Randa Shickh, Guy Faulkner, Bradley J. MacIntosh, Brian W. McCrindle, Rachel Mitchell, Benjamin I. Goldstein

Bibliographic record

VenueMental health and physical activity · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBipolar Disorder and Treatment
Canadian institutionsCanada Research ChairsUniversity of TorontoQueen's UniversityHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of British ColumbiaHealth Sciences CentreSunnybrook Health Science CentreCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
FundersSunnybrook Research InstituteFondation Brain Canada
KeywordsIntervention (counseling)Psychological interventionMoodThematic analysisPsychologyAerobic exerciseCardiorespiratory fitnessPsychoeducationCLARITYQualitative researchBipolar disorderClinical psychologyMedicinePsychiatryPhysical therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives Despite multiple potential physical and mental benefits of aerobic exercise, individuals with bipolar disorder (BD) report low engagement in aerobic exercise and decreased cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF). Given the scarcity of interventions that focus on aerobic exercise and CRF in BD, a novel behaviour change counselling (BCC) intervention was developed and conducted to increase aerobic exercise in youth with BD. The aim of this study was to elucidate participant feedback on the BCC intervention, using post-intervention consultation forums. Methods Of 20 youth with BD who enrolled in the 24-week BCC intervention, 11 attended consultation forums after completing the study. Five parents also participated in separate parent consultation forums. Questions included asking about participants’ overall experiences, helpful/unhelpful components, feedback on core and optional modules, and recommendations for future interventions. Forums were audiotaped and transcribed verbatim. Forums were analysed using both content and thematic analyses, with deductive and inductive qualitative approaches. Results For feasibility, themes of ‘ managing mood and/or psychiatric symptoms’ , ‘ adapting life to include exercise’ , and ‘ providing structured support through an intervention’ were identified. For acceptability, we identified themes of ‘ awareness of the importance of exercise’ , ‘ adaptable approach to changing needs and wants’ , and ‘ improving clarity of available components and materials’ . For impact, themes of ‘ exercise change is gradual and ongoing’ , and ‘ attitudes and beliefs around exercise can change’ were elucidated. Conclusion Youth with BD and their parents reported experiencing subjective benefits following the BCC intervention. Several challenges and barriers were also noted that will require consideration for future exercise intervention designs. Clinical trials registration number NCT03562520.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.075

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.007
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.031
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.326 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMental health and physical activitySame topicBipolar Disorder and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207