Physical Activity and the Development of the Built Environment in Schools for Youth with a Functional Disability in Quebec
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background: Assess how primary and secondary schools were designed to encourage the practice of physical and sporting activities for young people with limited physical abilities. Analyse the impacts of the built environment on the adoption of active behaviours for the disabled clientele in schools. Materials and methods: Fifteen schools in Quebec were examined using two structured and coded observation grids. Fifty-two interviews were held with each school’s administrative team, physical education teachers, the professional staff, parents and youth with limited physical abilities. Results: The school environment is a central component in the inclusion of youth with physical limitations. However, the lack of means, the dilapidated state of some spaces along with the lack of knowledge of the different populations of youth with limited physical abilities can account for the fact that the schools observed offer an environment that is more of less accessible or poorly adapted to these young people. Conclusions: Most of the time, certain non-existent or deficient faculties in the surveyed areas have a negative impact on the autonomy, perseverance, and the level of inclusion of young individuals with limited physical abilities. It therefore seems essential to adapt and develop areas of activity in accordance with the clientele’s (or potential clientele’s) physical limitations
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".