Áhrifaþættir þjálfunar hjá fólki með slitgigt : hvað hvetur, hvað letur?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Evidence increasingly indicates that regular exercise improves the wellbeing of individuals with osteoarthritis (OA).However, research results indicate that individuals with OA exercise less frequently than individuals their age without OA and have limited adherence to exercising.Purpose: To increase understanding of what is the experience of exercising amongst individuals with OA, including contributing facilitators and barriers.Method: A purposive sample of twelve individuals, age 50 -82 years, 9 female and 3 male, was used.The method was qualitative, based on the Vancouver School of doing phenomenology, featuring open, unstructured dialogues.Results: Motivation and the attitude towards pain emerged as the key factors that influenced exercise behaviour.Other important personal factors included adaptability, initiative, attitude regarding health and exercise, and prior exercise experience.Social surroundings and the attitude of health professionals and family members were influential.Other influences include the physical therapists' (PTs) realistic assessment of the individuals ability to exercise, and the cooperation with the PT.External factors (i.e.weather, facilities and transportation) were either facilitators or barriers.Difficulties with personal hygiene was also mentioned as a barrier to exercising.Conclusions: Concerning regular exercise by OA individuals it is important that health professionals are aware that motivation can emerge from pleasure and/or results, that they realise that the attitude towards pain is a key factor and that different personal and external factors can either be facilitators or barriers.Physicians' awareness should be increased concerning the importance of exercise for individuals with OA, PTs' accurate assessment of hrifaaettir jlfunar hj flki me slitgigt VII an OA individuals ability to exercise is a critical factor, as is professional care.It should be noted that the conclusions of this research may be used to develop an instrument to assess facilitators and barriers to exercise amongst individuals with OA.
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 | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.015 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".