MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1489441574

Opportunities For Enhancing Vigorous Physical Activity Within The New Brunswick Physical Education Curriculum

2010· book· en· W1489441574 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kari Ann Parsons, A. Belcastro

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Entomology and Zoology · 2010
Typebook
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChildren's Physical and Motor Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurriculumPhysical educationIntervention (counseling)Physical activityClass (philosophy)Physical therapyPsychologyHealth educationMedical educationMedicineMathematics educationPedagogyNursingPublic healthComputer science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: To determine if participation in a short-term, high intensity physical education (PE) intervention that respected the multiple goals of the PE curriculum would result in any health- and/or fitness-related improvements for grade four and five students. METHODS: Seventy-six students were divided into a control and intervention group (CG & IG). During 15 successive classes, the IG participated in six minutes of high intensity activities while no changes were made to the structure of the CG’s PE class. Accelerometers and direct observation were used to quantify the percentage of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (%MVPA). Health- and performance-related measures were assessed pre- and post-intervention. RESULTS: Students spent an average of 27% of their PE class engaged in MVPA. Within this category, the intervention was successful at increasing students’ VPA levels by 7.7%. Observations regarding pedagogical practices are also reported. CONCLUSIONS: Participating in a PE intervention can increase students’ PA levels without compromising the goals of the PE curriculum.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.983
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.285 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical Entomology and ZoologySame topicChildren's Physical and Motor DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207