Increasing Physical Activity in Empty Nest and Retired Populations Online: A Randomized Feasibility Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The onset of retirement and children leaving the family home may offer a "window of opportunity" for individuals to influence regular moderate- to vigorous-intensity physical activity; therefore, this study examines the feasibility of a moderate- to vigorous-intensity physical activity intervention among recently retired participants (RET) and parents (P) with children who recently left the family home. A total of 46 inactive RET and nine inactive P were randomized to a 10-week web intervention (n = RET = 25/P = 4) or waitlist control (n = RET = 21/P = 5). Intervention techniques followed the multiprocess action control framework. Enrollment (37.5% for P; 40% for RET), retention (89% for P; 83% for RET), and satisfaction were high. One hundred percent of intervention-sectioned participation increased moderate- to vigorous-intensity physical activity compared with 52% of controls; large effect size differences were observed for key multiprocess action control constructs. Participants were highly satisfied with the intervention; however, recruitment challenges of P support moving to a randomized controlled trial for only the RET group.
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 | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
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".