Connecting Children to Recreational Activities: Results of a Cluster Randomized Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Identify if outreach support increases school-aged children's participation in recreational activities. DESIGN: Cluster randomized trial. SETTING: Sixteen schools in economically vulnerable neighborhoods were randomized to either an intervention or control group. SUBJECTS: Children in grades 3 to 5 and their families were invited to participate. INTERVENTION: Children in intervention schools were assigned a "connector" (outreach worker) to facilitate participation in recreation activities. MEASURES: The Children's Assessment of Participation and Enjoyment (CAPE) was the primary measure at baseline, middle, and end of 1 year. Demographics, body mass index, child physical and psychosocial health, coordination, and self-esteem were measured. ANALYSIS: A generalized linear model was used to test differences between intervention and control groups. RESULTS: Three hundred and sixty children enrolled, and 306 (85%) completed the study. A greater proportion of children in the intervention group compared with the control group increased participation in physical activity (21% vs. 10%, p = .02). Children who increased their activity were more likely to have higher levels of contact with the connectors (31% vs. 8%, p = .001). Study limitations included (1) 29% of eligible families participated, (2) first use of the CAPE instrument as a longitudinal measure, and (3) connectors were not blinded to group assignment. CONCLUSION: Children living in vulnerable neighborhoods benefit from outreach workers to connect them with physical activity programs.
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 | 0.009 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.001 |
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".