Understanding the Perception of People With Young Onset Dementia on the Experiences, Facilitators, and Barriers of Physical Activity: An Exploratory Qualitative Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Physical activity (PA) benefits the physical and mental well-being of people living with dementia; however, the experiences of people with young onset dementia (YOD) are poorly examined. The objective of this study was to understand the experiences of persons living with YOD related to PA and their barriers, facilitators, and preferences for PA. METHODS: People living with YOD were recruited across Canada (n = 8). Participants completed a demographic questionnaire followed by a semistructured interview. Transcripts were analyzed using inductive thematic analysis and deductive content analysis. RESULTS: Three themes were identified: (a) Just keep moving: the benefits of PA describes participants' perceptions of PA as meaningful, enjoyable, and beneficial to their mental and physical health; (b) An encouraging social environment: a motivator for PA describes participants' preferences for group activities that foster social connection and support; and (c) Transition from own worst enemy to guardian angel describes participants' journeys from initial diagnosis to realizing that they can still be active and enjoy life with a diagnosis of YOD. Participants' barriers and facilitators to PA were identified and mapped corresponding to categories including self, social environment, and external environment. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that PA supports well-being, empowerment, and autonomy of people living with YOD. Significance/Implications: Program leaders can use findings to address barriers experienced by people with YOD and educate others on the needs of people with YOD to support PA participation.
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 | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".