Framing physical literacy for aging adults: an integrative review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Physical literacy is an important component for improving functional health for adults. However, little is known how physical literacy can be framed to support the rehabilitation needs of aging adults. An integrative review was conducted to understand what components are used to frame physical literacy for adults. Electronic databases were searched from 2000–2021 for eligibility criteria including: 1) adults ≥45 years of age, 2) addressed physical literacy OR physical literacy components AND referred to outcomes assessing either mobility, physical function, rehabilitation, health promotion, health prevention, public health, or physical activity. A total of 22 articles met the inclusion criteria. The varied methodological quality, including grey literature (50%) to systematic reviews (14%), indicates that physical literacy for adults is a novel topic. When defining physical literacy for adults, 13 new constructs emerged with purposeful activities, knowledge of age-related changes and social interaction as the top three. Physical literacy interventions demonstrated improvements in self-efficacy, physical function, and exercise behaviour. Findings from the current literature indicate that engagement in purposeful, social, and diverse activities, obtaining knowledge of age-related changes and being able to self-adapt to mobility fluctuations is the foundation to becoming a physically literate adult.Implications for RehabilitationPhysical literacy is emerging as a promising health strategy for adults and older adults.Reconceptualization of the physical literacy construct to include rehabilitation approaches is needed to address the mobility challenges associated with aging.The foundation to becoming a physically literate adult involves monitoring one’s ability for movement and having the knowledge to identify and remediate changes in function while engaging in purposeful movements.Physical literacy programs for adults and older adults have potential to positively impact important health outcomes equitably for all individuals. Physical literacy is emerging as a promising health strategy for adults and older adults. Reconceptualization of the physical literacy construct to include rehabilitation approaches is needed to address the mobility challenges associated with aging. The foundation to becoming a physically literate adult involves monitoring one’s ability for movement and having the knowledge to identify and remediate changes in function while engaging in purposeful movements. Physical literacy programs for adults and older adults have potential to positively impact important health outcomes equitably for all individuals.
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 | 0.033 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.013 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".