MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1982509117 · doi:10.3200/jach.52.4.181-188

Transition to University and Vigorous Physical Activity: Implications for Health and Psychological Well-Being

2004· article· en· W1982509117 on OpenAlexaffabout
Steven R. Bray, Heidi A Born

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of American College Health · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPhysical Activity and Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Lethbridge
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysical activityPsychologyGerontologyMedicineClinical psychologyDemographyPhysical therapySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The authors investigated vigorous physical activity and psychological well-being during transition from high school to first-year university in a sample of 145 Canadian undergraduates. Participants completed retrospective measures assessing vigorous physical activity during their first 2 months at university and their last 2 months at high school as well as measures assessing psychological well-being. According to nationally recommended (US Department of Health and Human Services) standards, two thirds (66.2%) of students reported adequate levels of vigorous activity in high school, whereas significantly fewer (44.1%) met the standard during their first 8 weeks at university. One third of students were active in high school but became insufficiently active once at university; 33% were active at both times; 23% consistently fell short of recommended levels; and only 11% became active once at university. Students who had become insufficiently active reported higher levels of fatigue and lower levels of vigor compared with those who continued to be active.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.334
Threshold uncertainty score0.665

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.039
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.340 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations465
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of American College HealthSame topicPhysical Activity and HealthFrench-language works237,207