Barriers and facilitators of physical function, activity, sports and exercise in children and adolescents with spinal pain: a protocol for a systematic review and meta-ethnography
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Spinal pain is one of the leading causes of disability, with the incidence of adolescent back pain estimated at 20%. Multiple barriers influence exercise participation in adolescents. However, there remains a lack of literature surrounding patients' choice to exercise, perceived barriers and facilitators of exercise, and their relationship to participant demographics. The aim of this systematic review with meta-ethnography will be to identify the barriers and facilitators of exercise participation among adolescents with thoracic or lower back pain (LBP). The secondary aim will be to identify any trends in barriers and facilitators of exercise between different demographic groups within children or adolescents under 18 years. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The seven-phase process identified by Noblit and Hare's meta-ethnography approach will be used. A comprehensive electronic search of databases (AMED, CINAHLplus, EMBASE, MEDLINE, SCOPUS, Nursing & Allied Health, PubMed, PsycINFO, SPORTDiscus, Social Science Database) will be completed during April 2022. Grey literature using reference lists, websites and search engines will also be searched in accordance with Peer Review of Electronic Search Strategies (PRESS) guidelines. Inclusion criteria include: (A) qualitative studies, (B) participants under 18 years experiencing thoracic or LBP, (C) identification of barriers and facilitators of exercise participation in exercise, sports or physical activity and (D) primary research. This systematic review with meta-ethnography review aims to generate theories of behaviours and interpret significance across multiple studies. This process aims to develop future physiotherapeutic behavioural interventions, inform service provision and identify possible future research questions. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: No ethical approval was required due to the nature of using previously published work to form a systematic review paper. This systematic review and meta-ethnography will be disseminated through both conference presentations and journal publications. No funding was received for this review. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42022314796.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".