MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407206069 · doi:10.1080/14927713.2025.2461771

Dimensions of social inclusion of older adults in leisure-time physical activity: development of a scale

2025· article· en· W4407206069 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mahshid Gholipoor, Farzad Ghafouri, Holger Preuß

Bibliographic record

VenueLeisure/Loisir · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHealth disparities and outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScale (ratio)Inclusion (mineral)Leisure timePhysical activityPsychologyGerontologyLeisure activityDevelopmental psychologyMedicinePhysical medicine and rehabilitationSocial psychologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The importance of social inclusion in Leisure-Time Physical Activity (LTPA) for the health of older adults has been recognized. The aim of this study was to identify the dimensions of Social Inclusion of Older Adults in Leisure-Time physical activity (SIOAiLTPA) and develop a measurement scale for these dimensions. The SIOAiLTPA scale was completed by 581 older adults in Iran. All respondents were 60 years old or older. Exploratory factor analysis resulted in a 48-item scale with 5 factors (individual characteristics, support for older adults, Coach Training programmes, legal structures, and pressures for deinstitutionalization). Confirmatory factor analysis confirmed the five-factor model and hierarchical structure. The SIOAiLTPA scale is the first psychometrically developed tool to measure the underlying factors of social inclusion of older adults in LTPA rather than its outcomes. This scale can assist national policymakers and sports organizations in measuring social inclusion of older adults in LTPA and the effectiveness of interventions or changes in programmes.

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 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)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.491
Threshold uncertainty score0.718

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.315 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLeisure/LoisirSame topicHealth disparities and outcomesFrench-language works237,207