4.3 Article

Just how special are the physical activity cognitions in diseased populations? Preliminary evidence for integrated content in chronic disease prevention and rehabilitation

期刊

ANNALS OF BEHAVIORAL MEDICINE
卷 33, 期 3, 页码 302-311

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1007/BF02879912

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: The extant literature is building on subdividing physical activity (PA) correlates and interventions by health condition (e.g., diabetes, cancer, etc.). Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare the mean values and correlations of a population sample divided by mutually exclusive health condition status (nondiseased, cardiovascular disease and risk factors, cancer, diabetes, and arthritis) on theory of planned behavior beliefs and physical activity after adjusting for sociodemographic factors. The relationship between compounding health conditions/comorbidities and these beliefs with PA was also evaluated. Methods: Participants were a U.S. sample of 6,739 adults (M age = 49.65, SD = 16.04) who completed relevant social and medical demographics, measures of behavioral, normative, and control beliefs, and self-reported PA. Results: Mean analyses identified greater health barriers to PA for the arthritis population compared to the other groups (eta(2) > .025), whereas physician norms anti health barriers were higher for compounding health condition populations compared to the nondiseased group (eta(2) > .025). Belief-behavior correlations, however, were not different across health conditions (q < .19), and nondiseased and single disease populations had larger control belief-behavior correlations than those populations with compounding health conditions (q > .19). Conclusions: These data generally provide preliminary evidence for an integrated approach to PA promotion content in primary prevention and health rehabilitation with some possible tailoring in the areas of health barriers. This area of research will benefit from future studies that build off of these results.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据