Reliability of health‐related physical fitness tests in adolescents: the MOVE <scp>P</scp>rogram
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim was to examine the reliability of health-related physical fitness tests that were used in a French health promotion program 'Move…A priority for your health'. Participants were 174 French youth (88 children and 86 adolescents) aged 8·2-16·2 years. Aerobic fitness, muscular strength, speed and flexibility were tested using 20-m shuttle run test, ½ mile run test, basketball throw, standing long jump, shoulder stretch and 20/30/50-m sprint tests. Reliability was calculated for the basketball throw, standing long jump, shoulder stretch and sprint tests. The tests were performed two times, 1 week apart on the same day of the week. Reliability was examined with intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) and Bland-Altman analysis. With the exception of the ½ mile run test, which resulted in moderate agreement (0·66), all tests had high reliability. ICCs were 0·97, 0·93, 0·91 and 0·93 for the sprint test, basketball throw, shoulder stretch and the standing long jump, respectively. The differences obtained between the first and the second trial were non-significant. Results from this study indicate that the BOUGE health-related physical fitness battery, administrated by physical education teachers, was reliable for measuring health-related components of fitness in children and adolescents in a school setting.
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.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it