Māori和non-Māori活动的认知负荷:新西兰共识

Kristina Zawaly, N. Kerse, L. Tippett, S. Buetow
{"title":"Māori和non-Māori活动的认知负荷:新西兰共识","authors":"Kristina Zawaly, N. Kerse, L. Tippett, S. Buetow","doi":"10.35831/sor.erh.08262019kz","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: To estimate the cognitive-load of self-reported physical and cognitive activities by New Zealand’s (NZ) indigenous population (Māori) and non‑Māori from the Life and Living in Advanced Age‑Cohort Study New Zealand (LiLACS NZ).\nMethods: Three-round panel Delphi exercise in NZ involving six panellists across an expert rater group and a peer-rater agroup of Māori and non‑Māori respectively, via web-based and face‑to‑face discussion.\nResults: In Round i (pre-Delphi exercise) the investigator group, gathered and categorised data from LiLACS NZ and developed a 9-point Likert-scale to rate the cognitive-load. Round ii panellists each rated the cognitive‑load of each activity. If a priori specified criteria were not met, then round iii involved a face‑to‑face meeting to discuss and re-rate activities on which consensus was lacking.\nConclusions: Māori reached consensus in round ii while non‑Māori did so in round iii. Panellists provided a formal consensus-based cognitive-load rating for 181 activities separately for Māori and non‑Māori.\nKeywords: three to five keywords: Delphi Technique, physical activity, ageing, cognitive activity","PeriodicalId":265900,"journal":{"name":"Spotlight on Exploratory Research in Health","volume":"137 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-08-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cognitive-load of activities for Māori and non-Māori: a New Zealand consensus\",\"authors\":\"Kristina Zawaly, N. Kerse, L. Tippett, S. Buetow\",\"doi\":\"10.35831/sor.erh.08262019kz\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Introduction: To estimate the cognitive-load of self-reported physical and cognitive activities by New Zealand’s (NZ) indigenous population (Māori) and non‑Māori from the Life and Living in Advanced Age‑Cohort Study New Zealand (LiLACS NZ).\\nMethods: Three-round panel Delphi exercise in NZ involving six panellists across an expert rater group and a peer-rater agroup of Māori and non‑Māori respectively, via web-based and face‑to‑face discussion.\\nResults: In Round i (pre-Delphi exercise) the investigator group, gathered and categorised data from LiLACS NZ and developed a 9-point Likert-scale to rate the cognitive-load. Round ii panellists each rated the cognitive‑load of each activity. If a priori specified criteria were not met, then round iii involved a face‑to‑face meeting to discuss and re-rate activities on which consensus was lacking.\\nConclusions: Māori reached consensus in round ii while non‑Māori did so in round iii. Panellists provided a formal consensus-based cognitive-load rating for 181 activities separately for Māori and non‑Māori.\\nKeywords: three to five keywords: Delphi Technique, physical activity, ageing, cognitive activity\",\"PeriodicalId\":265900,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Spotlight on Exploratory Research in Health\",\"volume\":\"137 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-08-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Spotlight on Exploratory Research in Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.35831/sor.erh.08262019kz\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Spotlight on Exploratory Research in Health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.35831/sor.erh.08262019kz","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

前言:估计新西兰(NZ)土著人口(Māori)和非Māori的自我报告的身体和认知活动的认知负荷,来自新西兰老年生活队列研究(LiLACS NZ)。方法:通过网络和面对面的讨论,在新西兰进行三轮小组德尔菲练习,涉及来自专家评议小组和同行评议小组Māori和非Māori的六名小组成员。结果:在第i轮(delphi前练习)中,研究小组收集并分类了来自LiLACS NZ的数据,并制定了9分李克特量表来评估认知负荷。第二轮的小组成员分别对每项活动的认知负荷进行打分。如果事先指定的标准没有得到满足,则第三轮涉及面对面会议,讨论和重新评价缺乏协商一致意见的活动。结论:Māori在第二轮中达成共识,而非Māori在第三轮中达成共识。小组成员分别为Māori和非Māori的181项活动提供了基于正式共识的认知负荷评级。关键词:三到五个关键词:德尔菲法,身体活动,衰老,认知活动
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Cognitive-load of activities for Māori and non-Māori: a New Zealand consensus
Introduction: To estimate the cognitive-load of self-reported physical and cognitive activities by New Zealand’s (NZ) indigenous population (Māori) and non‑Māori from the Life and Living in Advanced Age‑Cohort Study New Zealand (LiLACS NZ). Methods: Three-round panel Delphi exercise in NZ involving six panellists across an expert rater group and a peer-rater agroup of Māori and non‑Māori respectively, via web-based and face‑to‑face discussion. Results: In Round i (pre-Delphi exercise) the investigator group, gathered and categorised data from LiLACS NZ and developed a 9-point Likert-scale to rate the cognitive-load. Round ii panellists each rated the cognitive‑load of each activity. If a priori specified criteria were not met, then round iii involved a face‑to‑face meeting to discuss and re-rate activities on which consensus was lacking. Conclusions: Māori reached consensus in round ii while non‑Māori did so in round iii. Panellists provided a formal consensus-based cognitive-load rating for 181 activities separately for Māori and non‑Māori. Keywords: three to five keywords: Delphi Technique, physical activity, ageing, cognitive activity
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Does Playing with Barbie in Childhood Affect Later Body Image? Patients’ Perspectives of Pain, Time, and Hope When Living with Venous Leg Ulcers and Using the geko™ Device: A Qualitative Descriptive Inquiry. Student Perceptions of Academic Service Learning in the Online Public Health Classroom: A Pilot Study Cognitive-load of activities for Māori and non-Māori: a New Zealand consensus Adherence to a Dysphagia Exercise Program by Oropharyngeal Cancer Survivors
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1