MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7029259130

Intrapersonal and social environment correlates of leisure-time physical activity for cancer prevention: a cross-sectional study among Canadian adults

2014· article· en· W7029259130 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueNOVA (University of Newcastle Australia) · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReligion, Theology, History, Judaism, Christianity
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntrapersonal communicationCancerPhysical activityPublic healthCancer survivorDiet and cancerCancer preventionSocial environment
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Little is known about the intrapersonal and social factors associated with sufficient physical activity (PA) for cancer prevention, which is greater than for cardiovascular health. Methods: 1087 and 1684 randomly selected men and women, age 35–64, completed self-administered questionnaires on PA behavior and psycho-social characteristics. Using gender-stratified logistic regression, we investigated correlates of compliance with Canadian Society for Exercise Physiology PA guidelines for general health (150 min/wk), and the American Cancer Society (ACS; 225 min/wk) and World Cancer Research Fund/Ameri- can Institute for Cancer Research (WCRF/AIRC; 420 min/wk) guidelines for cancer prevention. Results: Only 39% and 19% of men and women met ACS and WCRF/AICR guidelines, respectively. Self-efficacy, scheduling PA and friend social support were positively correlated with recommended PA for cancer prevention. In men, poor self-rated health and perceived negative outcomes were negatively correlated and hypertension was positively correlated with meeting cancer prevention guidelines. For women, not being married and having a companion for PA were positively correlated with meeting cancer prevention guidelines. Conclusions: Few adults participate in sufficient PA for cancer risk reduction. Multidimensional public health strategies that incorporate intrapersonal and social factors and are tailored for each gender are needed to promote PA for cancer prevention.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.075
Threshold uncertainty score0.598

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 studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.253 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNOVA (University of Newcastle Australia)Same topicReligion, Theology, History, Judaism, ChristianityFrench-language works237,207