Physical activity and well-being post-cardiac rehabilitation: adopting the empirical model of well-being
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Both physical activity and well-being have been shown to play an important role for individuals with cardiovascular disease. Unfortunately, the underlying mechanisms responsible for enhancing well-being and physical activity in this population remains unclear. The purpose of this study was (a) to examine if a bidirectional relationship exists between physical activity with both hedonic (accepted as the pursuit of pleasure, happiness, comfort and enjoyment) and eudaimonic (equates happiness with the human ability to pursue complex goals that are meaningful to the individual and society) well-being and (b) to test a proposed modified empirical eudaimonic model of well-being in a sample of individuals who completed a cardiac rehabilitation program. This modified model adds hedonic motives and well-being and examines where physical activity fits within the model. Individuals who completed a cardiac rehabilitation program within the last five years (N = 57) were asked to answer to a set of well-being and basic psychological needs questionnaires and wear an accelerometer for nine days to measure physical activity. Results showed that the relationship between eudaimonic well-being and physical activity appeared to be bi-directional as the strength of the path coefficients were similar when baseline physical activity predicted residual change in eudaimonic well-being at three months (B = .002, 95%CI = .00 to .003, β=.15) and when baseline eudaimonic well-being predicted residual change in physical activity at three months (B = 20.83, 90%CI=-6.75 to 72.26, β=.16). The relationship between hedonic well-being and physical activity was uni-directional whereby physical activity predicted hedonic well-being (B=.002, 95%CI = .00 to .006, β=.15). The empirical eudaimonic model of well-being and the modified model with addition of hedonic motives and well-being was supported in a post-cardiac rehabilitation sample. Physical activity fit best as a predictor of the modified empirical model. Overall, physical activity and well-being are two variables important for adults in post-cardiac rehabilitation given their interrelationships. Future prospective studies should attempt to replicate these findings to ensure some consistency in the relationships given the small sample size of this study. Future interventions in individuals post-cardiac rehabilitation could attempt to include well-being interventions aimed to enhance one's interest, elevating experiences and meaning in life while maintaining a strong focus on physical activity.
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 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".