The SHINE (Supporting Her In Navigating Exercise) Program: Examining Peer Support as an Exercise Promotion Tool Among Female Undergraduate Students: A Study Protocol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Despite the benefits of regular exercise, many Canadians, especially female undergraduate students (FUS), experienced decreased engagement throughout the pandemic: due, in part, to feelings of low social support and confidence. One promising approach to enhance exercise is peer-mentorship programs (PMP): pairing knowledge-seeking individuals with experienced mentors. To date, FUS PMP research remains sparse. Objective: Grounded in Self-Determination Theory, this experimental study will examine the impact of an eight-week exercise-focused, campus-based PMP on FUS adherence and psychological needs. Method: Forty full-time FUS who do not meet Canada’s movement guidelines will be randomized (20 exercise; 20 exercise plus mentor); 5 Kinesiology students with exercise expertise will be recruited as mentors. All participants will receive a standardized facility tour and an exercise program. Mentors will attend exercise sessions and provide regular virtual support for treatment-group participants. Quantitative data will be collected pre-, mid-, and post-intervention through the Psychological Needs Satisfaction in Exercise Scale and Behavioural Regulation in Exercise Questionnaire-3. Participants will electronically log their exercise; all FUS will be invited to complete a one-on-one semi-structured interview post-intervention to gain insights into the quantitative data and study involvement experiences. Results: Based on previous research, both groups are expected to show positive changes, with greater improvements anticipated in the treatment condition. Conclusion: Uncovering effective methods to promote FUS exercise engagement is crucial for fostering a healthy campus. Strengthening a more movement culture in this context will enrich student engagement and mental well-being: pivotal for establishing lifelong habits during this developmental period.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".