Does proximity to physical activity infrastructures predict maintenance of organized and unorganized physical activities in youth?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Physical activity (PA) infrastructures can provide youth chances to engage in PA. As determinants of organized and unorganized PA (OPA and UPA) may differ, we investigated if proximity to PA infrastructures (proximity) was associated with maintenance of OPA and UPA over 3 years. Youth from New Brunswick, Canada (n = 187; 10-12 years at baseline) reported participation in OPA and UPA every 4 months from 2011 to 2014 as part of the MATCH study. Proximity data were drawn from parent's questionnaires. Proximity scores were divided into tertiles. Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazard models were used to assess associations between proximity and maintenance of OPA and UPA. There were no crude or adjusted differences in average maintenance of participation in OPA [mean number of survey cycle participation (95%CI) was 6.6 (5.7-7.5), 6.3 (5.5-7.1), and 5.8 (5.1-6.6)] or UPA [6.8 (6.2-7.4), 5.9 (5.3-6.5), and 6.6 (5.9-7.3)] across low, moderate, and high tertiles of proximity, respectively. Findings suggest that proximity does not affect maintenance of participation in OPA or UPA during adolescence. Other environmental aspects may have a greater effect. Further research is needed before conclusions can be made.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".