Physical <scp>A</scp>ctivity <scp>Q</scp>uestionnaire for children and adolescents: <scp>E</scp>nglish norms and cut‐off points
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Physical Activity Questionnaire for Children and Adolescents (PAQ-C/-A) provides general estimates of physical activity levels. Following recent expert recommendations for using the PAQ for population surveillance, the aim of this paper was twofold: first, to describe normative PAQ data for English youth; and second, to determine a criterion-referenced PAQ-score cut-off point. METHODS: Participants (n = 7226, 53% boys, 10-15 years) completed an anglicized version of the PAQ. Peak oxygen uptake (VO2peak ) was predicted from PACER lap count according to latest FITNESSGRAM standards and categorized into "at-risk" and "no-risk" for metabolic syndrome. ROC curves were drawn for each age-sex group to identify PAQ scores, which categorized youth into "sufficiently active" versus "low-active" groups, using cardiorespiratory fitness as the criterion-referenced standard. RESULTS: PAQ scores were higher in boys than in girls and declined with age. Mean PAQ score was a significant, albeit relatively weak (area under the curve < 0.7) discriminator between "at-risk" and "no-risk." PAQ scores of ≥2.9 for boys and ≥2.7 for girls were identified as cut-off points, although it may be more appropriate to use lower, age-specific PAQ scores for girls of 13, 14 and 15 years (2.6, 2.4, 2.3, respectively). CONCLUSION: The normative and criterion-referenced PAQ values may be used to standardize and categorize PAQ scores in future youth population studies.
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 | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
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".