MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396952182 · doi:10.3390/disabilities4020024

Evaluating an Adapted Physical Activity Program for University Students and Staff Living with a Physical Disability and/or Chronic Condition through a Self-Determination Theory Lens

2024· article· en· W4396952182 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueDisabilities · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMotivation and Self-Concept in Sports
Canadian institutionsCentre for Interdisciplinary Research in RehabilitationMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysical activityPsychologyMedical educationGerontologyPedagogyMathematics educationMedicinePhysical therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this mixed-method study was to (1) examine the effect of an adapted physical activity program, Fitness Access McGill (FAM), on leisure-time physical activity (LTPA), autonomous and controlled motivation, and the basic psychological needs of self-determination theory among university students/staff with a physical disability and/or chronic conditions, and (2) explore participants’ experiences after completing FAM. Nineteen participants completed validated questionnaires for all study outcomes pre- and post-FAM. Nine participants partook in a 30–60 min semi-structured interview conducted within three months of completing FAM. Quantitative data were analyzed using repeated measures effect size calculations. Qualitative data were analyzed using directed content analysis. Participants reported an increase in total LTPA (dRMpooled = 0.58), with the greatest positive change on strenuous intensity (dRMpooled = 0.81). Large effects were found for changes in autonomous motivation (dRMpooled = 0.52), autonomy (dRMpooled = 0.79), competence (dRMpooled = 0.79), and relatedness (dRMpooled = 0.89). Participants reported FAM being supportive towards their psychological needs, the development of a LTPA routine, and enhanced overall well-being. Future research can be built upon this study to develop a robust understanding as to how need-supportive, adapted LTPA programs could be implemented within community settings or out-patient rehabilitation to support exercise engagement, physical health and overall well-being among adults with disabilities.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.539
Threshold uncertainty score0.618

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.412
Teacher spread0.351 · 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