Zooming In and Out of Programming: Developing an Approach to Trauma-and Violence-Informed Physical Activity “Post-Pandemic”
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Researchers have found that physical activity is an effective health promotion tool due to its positive effect on wellbeing, however, despite the overwhelming evidence on the benefits of physical activity, many structural and systemic inequities exist that affect access and uptake particularly for women. These barriers have been exacerbated over the last few years as conditions surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic has made engagement in physical activity even more difficult for equity-deserving populations. Community organizations have reported an increase in gender-based violence and a strain on support services. In this qualitative research study, we present findings that demonstrated how COVID-19 complicated the delivery of in-person programs for equity-deserving populations. Using a feminist participatory action research approach, community-specific barriers to physical activity from the perspectives of individuals who deliver physical activity programming and social services to self-identified women were generated in three themes using thematic analysis: 1) Increased Need, Decreased Services; 2) Online Service Provision was Not Effective for Clients or Providers; 3) Physical Activity was Not Deemed an “Essential Service”-Transitioning from Survival Mode to a New Normal. Taken together, findings underlined the importance of effective and sustainable resources and strategies to improve access for women to engage in physical activity programs.
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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".