Understanding the Perspectives of Latino Adults Who Smoke on Physical Activity: A Qualitative Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Smoking and sedentary lifestyle frequently co-occur among Latinos. Evidence suggests that moderate to vigorous physical activity (MVPA) may enhance smoking cessation rates. However, this synergistic phenomenon has not been studied among Latinos, the largest minority group in the United States. This qualitative study consisted of semi-structured interviews in English or Spanish with Latino adults who smoke (n = 20) to understand their perspectives on physical activity. Participants were recruited using community-based recruitment strategies. The Health Belief Model was used as a framework for qualitative theoretical analysis. Multiple perceived benefits (e.g., mood management, strategy to quit smoking), susceptibility (e.g., risk of cardiovascular diseases, physical impairment), and barriers (e.g., lack of social support, low financial resources) of being physically active were identified. Moreover, multiple cues to action to do physical activity (e.g., being a role model, spending time with family and friends) were identified. These factors provide concrete operational strategies to address smoking cessation and physical activity among Latinos. Further research is needed on how best to integrate these perspectives into smoking cessation interventions.
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 | 0.010 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".