MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1505907624 · doi:10.2196/resprot.4240

Mapping a Decade of Physical Activity Interventions for Primary Prevention: A Protocol for a Scoping Review of Reviews

2015· review· en· W1505907624 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Leah Goertzen, Gayle Halas, Janet Rothney, Annette Schultz, Pamela Wener, Jennifer Enns, Alan Katz

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPhysical Activity and Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsycINFOScopusPsychological interventionSystematic reviewData extractionProtocol (science)Grey literatureCochrane LibraryPsychologyMEDLINEApplied psychologyMedicineMedical educationAlternative medicineNursingPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Physical activity is a key behavioral component for the primary prevention of noncommunicable disease. The uptake of physical activity is influenced by individual and broader factors including social, economic, and environmental conditions. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this paper is to describe a protocol for a scoping review of reviews (SRR) that aims to map a decade of research focused on physical activity interventions within the domain of primary prevention. METHODS: The 5 stages of our SRRs design were adapted from a seminal scoping review methodology. Our search strategy was developed for the following databases: SPORTDiscus, PubMed, Scopus, the Cochrane Library, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, PsycINFO, and Educational Resources Information Centre. Two reviewers (LG and AK) independently screened eligible studies and compared results to determine the final study selection. One reviewer will conduct the data extraction (LG); a second reviewer (AK) will assess the results to ensure comprehensiveness and accuracy of the scoping review synthesis. RESULTS: The SRRs will provide a broad overview of the physical activity research literature specific to primary prevention, and will describe key features of physical activity interventions. Potential gaps in the physical activity action areas will be identified, and thus, the results will inform future research directions. CONCLUSIONS: This paper describes an innovative approach for comprehensively mapping an important topic's research trends in the last decade.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.486
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.004
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.831
GPT teacher head0.742
Teacher spread0.089 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations25
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research ProtocolsSame topicPhysical Activity and HealthFrench-language works237,207