Psychosocial factors associated with exercise engagement in adult users of primary healthcare services
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The prevalence of chronic noncommunicable diseases is high among Mexican adults. Adherence to healthy lifestyles, such as regular exercise, is essential for managing these diseases and preventing their complications. However, 60% of Mexican adults living in urban areas are not active. This study aimed to identify the association between psychosocial factors and adherence to exercise recommendations among Mexican adults receiving primary healthcare services. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted with 406 adults aged 20-64 years. The dependent variable was adherence to exercise recommendations for the adult population. Participants were classified into three categories - Active, Insufficiently Active, and Inactive - based on the metabolic equivalents per week expended on exercise. The Global Physical Activity Questionnaire was used to assess physical activity. The metabolic equivalents per week spent on leisure-time exercise were calculated. The psychosocial variables from the Transtheoretical Model included stages of readiness for change, self-efficacy, and decisional balance, and sociodemographic and health factors were also considered. In the statistical analysis, ordered logistic regression was used. Results: Associations were identified between stages of readiness for change and self-efficacy with exercise adherence categories. The multivariate analysis revealed that for each one-point increase on the self-efficacy scale, the likelihood of being in the Active category increased by 2.4%, while the likelihood of being in the Inactive category decreased. Males, compared to females, and adults aged 20-31 years, compared to those aged 32-64 years, were more likely to be in the Insufficiently Active and Active categories. Conclusions: Psychosocial factors such as stages of readiness for change and self-efficacy were associated with meeting the recommendation for exercise; these factors could be incorporated into the design and development of exercise promotion strategies for Mexican adults using primary healthcare services.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".