Self-compassion, physical activity, cardiovascular risk, and frailty among middle-aged and older women in Canada: A cross-sectional study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Self-compassion, a kind and protective way of relating to oneself, has been associated with both the self-regulation of, and engagement in many health behaviours. Yet, the limited research examining self-compassion and physical activity is mixed, warranting further investigation. Moreover, the relationship between self-compassion, self-regulation, and health suggests that self-compassionate people should experience lower rates of cardiovascular disease risk and frailty. However, little is known about the relationship between self-compassion and these health outcomes. In this cross-sectional study, we examined the relationship between self-compassion, physical activity, cardiovascular disease risk, and frailty, among a sample of 991 community-dwelling females in Canada (Mage = 64.5 (SD = 6.1) years; 99% women, 1% non-binary) who were members of the WARM Hearts cohort (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03938155). Measures included the 26-Item Self-Compassion Scale, the International Physical Activity Questionnaire, the Framingham 10-Year Cardiovascular Risk Score (adjusted for family history), and a 42-item Frailty Index. Hierarchical regression analyses controlling for age showed no relationship between self-compassion and weekly minutes of walking, moderate, or vigorous physical activity, or 10-year cardiovascular risk. However, self-compassion was significantly and negatively associated with frailty (β = -0.223, SE = 0.003, p < .001, 95% CI (-.030, -.017). This finding is relevant given the strong association between frailty and health outcomes. Further research is needed to determine whether self-compassion has a protective role against frailty. Additionally, since self-compassion and physical activity were not associated, future research should determine which health behaviours mediate the association between self-compassion and frailty.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".