Bidirectional week-to-week relationships between weekly psychological stress across multiple life domains and engagement with an exercise intervention: secondary analysis of data from a randomized trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Engaging in physical activity can reduce the risk of multiple morbidities and premature mortality. Psychological stress can hinder the development and maintenance of physical activity behaviors. There is a dearth of research on how these two processes interact. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to identify the week-to-week bidirectional associations between weekly psychological stress across multiple domains (e.g. social, economic) and adherence to a six-week mHealth exercise program among a previously inactive sample. METHODS: The secondary analyses reported in this study examine data derived from adults randomized to one of three mobile application(s)-based exercise arms embedded within the COPE trial (N = 251). The interventions delivered to participants in each arm involved six weeks of at-home exercise requiring no additional equipment. Relationships between psychological stress (as measured by a modified version of the Chronic Burden Scale) and engagement with the commercially available exercise apps were explored using a random intercept cross-lagged panel model (RI-CLPM). This model simultaneously assessed the longitudinal and bidirectional associations between psychological stress and exercise engagement and vice versa. RESULTS: Both psychological stress and engagement with the exercise interventions demonstrated significant positive autoregressive effects across successive weeks. However, the cross-lagged associations between stress and engagement with the exercise intervention were not significant. CONCLUSIONS: While the cross-lagged effects were non-significant, there was high variability between individuals. Future studies should use larger samples and methods that would allow an examination of an individual's relationship between psychological stress and exercise engagement.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".