MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4388720730 · doi:10.1370/afm.22.s1.4936

Hockey Fans In Training Graduate Program (HFIT Grad): Process Evaluation of an Add-on Fitness Program for HFIT Participants

2023· article· en· W4388720730 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Robert J. Petrella, Marisa Kfrerer, Olivia Crozier, Brendan Riggin, Wendy Blunt, Dawn P. Gill, Brooke Bliss

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPhysical Activity and Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOverweightContext (archaeology)Physical therapyPsychologyPopulationApplied psychologyGerontologyMedicineObesityEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Context: Approximately 1 in 4 Canadian adults are living with obesity, indicating a need to provide accessible, sustainable, and locally tailored programs to manage the disease long-term. HFIT Grad was a 6-week exercise and physical activity pilot program offered to previous participants who completed Hockey FIT (a 12-week healthy lifestyle program for male hockey fans who were overweight or had obesity) within the last 12 months. Objective: Evaluate the acceptability of HFIT Grad for promoting maintenance of health behaviours developed in Hockey FIT. Study Design and Analysis: Participants who completed HFIT Grad (n=27) were invited to participate in a virtual focus group (FG) over Zoom and program exit survey. FG was recorded, de-identified, and transcribed verbatim. Two researchers analyzed the transcripts and open-ended program exit survey responses thematically. Setting: HFIT Grad was delivered at two local community fitness facilities in Ontario, Canada. Population Studied: Past male participants who were overweight or had obesity, completed the Hockey FIT Program, and HFIT Grad. Intervention: HFIT Grad was delivered for 60 minutes, 2 times a week, across 6 weeks by previous Hockey FIT coaches with a background in fitness. Coaches were trained in the protocol and encouraged to adapt the exercises to fit participant abilities. Outcome Measures: One FG and program exit survey responses. Results: Participants signed up for HFIT Grad in pursuit of greater accountability in shifting back to or maintaining the health behaviour changes they made during Hockey FIT. HFIT Grad filled a previous gap in the Hockey FIT program by focusing on dynamic and challenging workouts, fostered by the advanced knowledge of the program coaches who were able to adapt, and add equipment that had not been used previously. Getting back together with their Hockey FIT peers was identified as an effective part of the program, increasing the bonds they had to each other and solidifying their commitment to helping each other maintain a healthy lifestyle. Suggestions for program improvement include incorporating check points for nutrition goals, running the program for more than six weeks with longer sessions, and one-on-one or more tailored exercises with more equipment. Conclusions: Based on participant feedback, the program was considered acceptable for the purpose of maintaining and improving health behaviour changes developed during Hockey FIT.

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.048
Threshold uncertainty score0.095

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.567
GPT teacher head0.548
Teacher spread0.019 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPhysical Activity and Health→French-language works237,207→