Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Comparing preferences to evaluations of barrier self-efficacy for two strength training programs in US older adults
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Comparing preferences to evaluations of barrier self-efficacy for two strength training programs in US older adults
Do you wish to request the book?
Comparing preferences to evaluations of barrier self-efficacy for two strength training programs in US older adults
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Comparing preferences to evaluations of barrier self-efficacy for two strength training programs in US older adults
2024
Overview
Engagement in regular physical activity is one of the best strategies for older adults to remain healthy. Unfortunately, only 35% of older adults meet guidelines for muscle strengthening activities. Eliciting participant preferences is one possible way to improve physical activity engagement. However, other sources of participant input to improve uptake and maintenance remain uninvestigated. This study compared preferences to self-efficacy ratings for two strength training programs.
We conducted a national cross-sectional survey of 611 US adults over age 65. We compared two participant evaluations (the preferred program and the program for which they had higher barrier self-efficacy) of two hypothetical strength training programs (45 minutes performed three times per week (traditional) and 5 minutes performed daily (brief)).
Most participants (68%) preferred the brief strength training program. The difference in self-efficacy ratings was an average of 1.2 (SD = 0.92). One in five participants preferred a strength training program for which they had less self-efficacy; nearly all of these participants (92%) preferred the traditional strength training program but had more self-efficacy for the brief strength training program.
Older adults reported preferring and having more self-efficacy for a brief compared to a traditional strength training program. Differences in self-efficacy ratings between the two strength training programs were large. Preferences were often not congruent with ratings of self-efficacy.
Preferences for strength training programming may not always reflect the program most likely to be maintained. Future investigations should evaluate differences in behavioral uptake, maintenance, and outcomes from two comparative strength training interventions using preferences and self-efficacy.
Publisher
Public Library of Science,Public Library of Science (PLoS)
Subject
