A038: Integrating Stair Climbing-Based Exercise Snacks into the Campus onFeasibility, Perceived Efficacy, and Participation Perspectives
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<bold>Objective:</bold> This study aimed to investigate the feasibility, perceived efficacy, and participation perspectives of a campus stair climbing-based exercise snacks (ES) intervention, and to compare it to moderate-intensity continuous training (MICT). <bold>Methods:</bold> Healthy, young, inactive adults were randomly assigned to three groups (ES, MICT, Control (CON)). ES (n = 14) and MICT (n = 13) groups performed 3 sessions per week over 6 weeks, while the control group (n = 15) maintained their habitual lifestyle. ES involved 3 × 30 s ‘all-out’ stair-climbing bouts separated by >1-h rest, and MICT involved 40 min stationary cycling at 60-70% HR<sub>max</sub>. ES participants also completed post-intervention semi-structured interviews. <bold>Results:</bold> Retention rates of 93% (ES, 14/15), 93% (MICT, 13/14), and 100% (CON, 15/15) were achieved from baseline to post-assessments, with compliance of 97% (733/756) and 93% (217/234) in ES and MICT. No significant differences were found between ES and MICT for future intentions, enjoyment, and satisfaction. A significant group × time interaction was found in quality of life and perceived stress. ES and MICT significantly increased quality of life by 8% (MD = 5.5 [95% CI = 0.3, 10.7], Cohen’s <italic>d</italic> = 0.64) and 6% (MD = 4.6 [95% CI = 0.9, 8.2], Cohen’s <italic>d</italic> = 0.88) compared to baseline, whereas CON experienced a significant decrease (MD = -7.9 [95% CI = -14.4, -1.6], Cohen’s <italic>d</italic> = 0.56). ES significantly decreased perceived stress by 7% (MD = -4.6 [95% CI = -8.9, -0.3], Cohen’s <italic>d</italic> = 0.58), while MICT (MD = 2.0 [95% CI = -0.1, 4.1], Cohen’s <italic>d</italic> = 0.28) and CON (MD = -2.4 [95% CI = -6.1, 1.3], Cohen’s <italic>d</italic> = 0.22) had no significant effects. The majority (12/14) of participants generally demonstrated positive attitudes toward participation in ES and found it easier than expected, while highlighting enablers, barriers, and future recommendations. <bold>Conclusion:</bold> Stair climbing-based ES could be integrated into the campus setting, appeared feasible, and was like MICT regarding future intentions, enjoyment, and satisfaction. Both ES and MICT improved quality of life compared to CON, and ES was superior to both MICT and CON for improving perceived stress. Interviews provided positive insights into fostering adherence to ES among university students.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".