Fitness of Canadian Children: Range from Traditional Inuit to Sedentary City Dwellers, and Assessment of Secular Changes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Large amounts of motor performance test data have been collected in Canada, as in Europe and other countries, but even where representative population samples have been selected, interpretation of the findings is difficult, and most conclusions remain tenuous. Urban Canadian children apparently showed a small increase of physical performance from the mid- 1960s through to about 1980, related in part to intensive governmental promotion of physical fitness and changes in gender roles of female students over this period. The two most recent decades have been marked by a shift of focus to health-related tests, the results showing a small but progressive deterioration in health-related fitness, with an accumulation of body fat, as documented by increases in body mass indices and skinfold thicknesses. In 1970, the fitness levels of urban children were substantially inferior to that of Inuit students, living in the high arctic and practicing a traditional, physically active lifestyle. However, by 1990, the Inuit children had adopted many of the sedentary habits typical of Canadian city dwellers, and had lost much of their previous advantage. At this stage, most Canadian students were not reaching their fitness potential, but their physical condition could be enhanced - in urban centers by an augmented physical education programme, and in the Inuit community by participation in programmes of active leisure. At present, Canadian students seem to be somewhat more fit than those in the US, but less fit than their peers in some European countries. Nevertheless, international comparison of Canadian data is currently hampered by differences in measurement techniques and failure of many investigators to test representative population samples.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".