MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416170713 · doi:10.1093/tbm/ibaf075

Health and Implementation Outcomes of Hockey Fans in Training (Hockey FIT) for Women: A Single-Arm Intervention Study

2025· article· en· W4416170713 on OpenAlexafffund
Marisa Kfrerer, Melissa Majoni, Dawn P. Gill, Brendan Riggin, Wendy Blunt, Maureen C. Ashe, Robert J. Petrella

Bibliographic record

VenueTranslational Behavioral Medicine · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSports injuries and prevention
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaLondon Health Sciences CentreWestern University
FundersPublic Health AgencyPublic Health Agency of Canada
KeywordsIntervention (counseling)Training (meteorology)Public healthPopulationHealth psychologyPopulation healthBrief intervention

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Hockey FIT is a gender-sensitized, evidence-based lifestyle intervention that engages men with overweight or obesity through their connection to local sports teams. Building on its demonstrated effectiveness, we adapted the program for women to address gender-specific barriers to health behavior change. PURPOSE: The objective of this study was to adapt and test Hockey FIT in women fans. METHODS: We conducted a single-arm intervention study with implementation evaluation to assess both health outcomes and implementation factors of the Hockey FIT program for women. The gender-sensitized program was adapted to reflect women's preferences and included 12 weekly, 90-minute group sessions led by trained coaches, incorporating goal setting, experiential learning, and peer support. Data were collected online and in person at baseline and 12 weeks. Outcome measures included self-reported steps/day, physical activity, sitting time, healthful eating, well-being, social support, and objectively measured weight and fitness. We explored the following implementation factors: reach, dose/attendance, fidelity/adaptation, participant responsiveness, acceptability, and barriers. RESULTS: Sixty women [mean (SD) 41 (11) years] enrolled in the study. Reasons for joining included a desire to connect with others sharing similar interests. There were significant mean changes from baseline to 12 weeks for steps (1318 steps, 95% CI: 51 to 2585), total physical activity, healthful eating, and well-being indicators. Participants voiced their desire for casual conversation and friendly competition to spur each other on. CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights the ability to deliver an effective intervention in a new population with promising outcomes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: Non-randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.106
GPT teacher head0.470
Teacher spread0.364 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNon-randomized trial
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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTranslational Behavioral MedicineSame topicSports injuries and preventionFrench-language works237,207