MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2004496301 · doi:10.1080/07399330701880911

Not Enough Time? Individual and Environmental Implications for Workplace Physical Activity Programming Among Women<i>with</i>and<i>without</i>Young Children

2008· article· en· W2004496301 on OpenAlexaffabout
Leonor S. Tavares, Ronald C. Plotnikoff

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Care For Women International · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUrban Transport and Accessibility
Canadian institutionsAlberta HealthUniversity of AlbertaAlberta Health Services
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAuditPhysical activityFocus groupPromotion (chess)PsychologyEnvironmental auditHealth promotionWork (physics)Applied psychologyGerontologyDevelopmental psychologyMedicinePublic healthNursingPhysical therapyPolitical scienceEngineeringBusinessMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study sets out to determine the main issues employed women with and without young children voice as influencing their physical activity behaviors, and to identify the environmental dimensions (e.g., physical, social, cultural, organizational, policy) within and outside of the workplace surrounding physical activity promotion that are most pertinent to employed women in Canada. Thirty employed women participated in focus groups, and four senior personnel were interviewed. Worksite observations were carried out and a Workplace Physical Activity Audit Tool was administered. Results indicate that time constraints and demands of personal and work life are barriers to achieving more activity. The issues surrounding family obligations and pressures for women with young children illustrate the main differences between groups. Key environmental factors are addressed and considered for future workplace physical activity programming goals.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.082
Threshold uncertainty score0.829

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.290 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations41
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealth Care For Women InternationalSame topicUrban Transport and AccessibilityFrench-language works237,207