MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W628962248 · doi:10.1139/y07-002

Who will be active? Predicting exercise stage transitions after hospitalization for coronary artery diseaseThis paper is one of a selection of papers published in this Special Issue, entitled Young Investigators' Forum.

2007· article· en· W628962248 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Robert D. Reid, Heather Tulloch, Jana Kocourek, Louise Morrin, Louise J. Beaton, Sophia Papadakis, Chris M. Blanchard, Dana L. Riley, Andrew Pipe

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Physiology and Pharmacology · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicBehavioral Health and Interventions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaDalhousie University
FundersUniversity of OttawaCanada Research ChairsHeart and Stroke Foundation of Canada
KeywordsCoronary artery diseaseRehabilitationMedicinePhysical therapyDiseaseStage (stratigraphy)Social cognitive theoryGerontologyPsychologyCardiologyInternal medicineSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We describe transitions between exercise stages of change in people with coronary artery disease (CAD) over a 6-month period following a CAD-related hospitalization and evaluate constructs from Protection Motivation Theory, Theory of Planned Behavior, Social Cognitive Theory, the Ecological Model, and participation in cardiac rehabilitation as correlates of stage transition. Seven hundred eighty-two adults hospitalized with CAD were recruited and administered a baseline survey including assessments of theory-based constructs and exercise stage of change. Mailed surveys were used to gather information concerning exercise stage of change and participation in cardiac rehabilitation 6 months later. Progression from pre-action stages between baseline and 6 month follow-up was associated with greater perceived efficacy of exercise to reduce risk of future disease, fewer barriers to exercise, more access to home exercise equipment, and participation in cardiac rehabilitation. Regression from already active stages between baseline and 6 month follow-up was associated with increased perceived susceptibility to a future CAD-related event, fewer intentions to exercise, lower self-efficacy, and more barriers to exercise.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.470
Threshold uncertainty score0.878

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1230.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.298 · 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.

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

Citations21
Published2007
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Physiology and PharmacologySame topicBehavioral Health and InterventionsFrench-language works237,207