The hockey fans in training intervention for men with overweight or obesity: a pragmatic cluster randomised trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Obesity disproportionately impacts men's health yet fewer men engage in preventive healthcare. We examined the effectiveness of Hockey Fans in Training (Hockey FIT), a gender-sensitised lifestyle intervention that engages men with overweight/obesity through their passion as fans of a local sports team, on weight change and other health indicators. Methods: ) within 42 community-based sites in Canada and the United States, randomly assigned (1:1) to intervention (Hockey FIT) or control (wait-list) and stratified by region. Sites were selected based on partnerships with local major junior/professional hockey teams and community implementation partners. Intervention participants received exercise and education during a three-month active phase (once-weekly, 90-min sessions) followed by a nine-month minimally-supported phase; control participants continued with usual activities. Primary outcome was weight change at 12 months. Assessment teams were blinded to group assignment including photos of weight measurements on digital scales, to provide proof of values recorded (post COVID-19). Analyses followed intent-to-treat. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03636282. Findings: Between November 13, 2018-November 12, 2021, 20 sites (n = 497) were allocated to intervention and 22 sites (n = 500) to control. Participants with baseline weight and weight at 3 or 12 months, were included in the primary analysis (20 intervention sites [n = 354]; 22 control sites [n = 425]). At 12 months, mean weight change was -2.02 kg (95% confidence interval [CI], -2.78 to -1.26) with intervention and -0.92 kg (CI, -1.58 to -0.26) with control (difference, -1.10 kg [CI, -2.11 to -0.09], p = 0.03). There were 22 non-study related serious adverse events (45.5% in intervention; 54.5% in control). Interpretation: Hockey FIT reduced weight in men with overweight or obesity. Hockey FIT is an innovative approach to engage men at increased risk of non-communicable disease in effective health behaviour change, through their passion as fans of their local hockey team. Funding: Public Health Agency of Canada; Canadian Institutes of Health Research.
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 | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 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".