Barriers and Promoters for Enrollment to a Community-Based Tai Chi Program for Older, Low-Income, and Ethnically Diverse Adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Low-income, ethnically diverse, older adults may be at greater health risk owing to their lower activity levels and potential cultural barriers to physical activity (PA) programs. To explore the specific barriers and promoters to enrollment to a 16-week Tai Chi (TC) program, we interviewed 87 lower socioeconomic older adults from multiple ethnic backgrounds before the initiation of a TC program. METHOD: Semistructured qualitative focus group interviews were conducted with questions focused on themes of barriers and promoters to enrollment in a TC program that might or might not be culturally or gender related. RESULTS: Important issues emerged that covered six categories. Categories included physical and mental health, time of day, socialization, program pairing, accessibility, and appropriate leadership/teacher. CONCLUSION: This information may have value for tailoring future PA programming in the community that could lead to improved health outcomes through better enrollment and increased participation in PA and exercise.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".