Impact, feasibility, and assessment of virtual physical activity programming for individuals with disabilities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite its known benefits, physical activity levels have consistently been lower than recommended among Canadian youth and adults, with levels even lower for those individuals with disabilities. These levels further plummeted through the COVID-19 pandemic due to in-person program restrictions. To combat the lack of program opportunities, the Acadia S.M.I.L.E. program reinvented the typical session into a virtual format. The purpose of this study was to observe and assess the effectiveness, impact, and feasibility of virtual physical activity programming for individuals with disabilities. The program was implemented for eight weeks between September and December of 2020. Three weeks throughout the term, a live virtual programming session occurred in addition to the weekly At-Home Activity Guides that were sent. A mixed-methodological case study approach was used to observe the effects of the program on functioning, physical literacy, physical activity of the participant, and support, regulation, and physical activity behaviours of the caregiver. Paired samples t-test analysis (p ≤ 0.05) of pre and post programming surveys showed no significant difference in physical literacy, physical activity, or caregiver support behaviours and weekly surveys showed low participation (μ=42.3%) with the At-Home Activity guides. Thematic analysis of caregiver and leader interviews presented five prominent themes: (a) program impact on physical activity, (b) virtual impact on programming, (c) program impact on social, cognitive, and motor goals, (d) impact of program design, and (e) program feasibility for families. Analysis of quantitative and qualitative data presented flaws within program creation yet showed the program to be beneficial for the physical literacy and physical activity of the participants. Future application of this program is to increase accessibility of the S.M.I.L.E. program and additional research should be conducted to further understand the effects of virtual physical literacy and physical activity programming.
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 | 0.008 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".