The effect of active video games by ethnicity, sex and fitness: subgroup analysis from a randomised controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The prevention and treatment of childhood obesity is a key public health challenge. However, certain groups within populations have markedly different risk profiles for obesity and related health behaviours. Well-designed subgroup analysis can identify potential differential effects of obesity interventions, which may be important for reducing health inequalities. The study aim was to evaluate the consistency of the effects of active video games across important subgroups in a randomised controlled trial (RCT). FINDINGS: A two-arm, parallel RCT was conducted in overweight or obese children (n=322; aged 10-14 years) to determine the effect of active video games on body composition. Statistically significant overall treatment effects favouring the intervention group were found for body mass index, body mass index z-score and percentage body fat at 24 weeks. For these outcomes, pre-specified subgroup analyses were conducted among important baseline demographic (ethnicity, sex) and prognostic (cardiovascular fitness) groups. No statistically significant interaction effects were found between the treatment and subgroup terms in the main regression model (p=0.36 to 0.93), indicating a consistent treatment effect across these groups. CONCLUSIONS: Preliminary evidence suggests an active video games intervention had a consistent positive effect on body composition among important subgroups. This may support the use of these games as a pragmatic public health intervention to displace sedentary behaviour with physical activity in young people.
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 | 0.027 | 0.047 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.014 | 0.024 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".