Children and youth do not compensate for an imposed bout of prolonged sitting by reducing subsequent food intake or increasing physical activity levels: a randomised cross-over study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The behavioural impact of an imposed bout of prolonged sitting is yet to be investigated in the paediatric population. The objective of the present study was to determine the acute effect of prolonged sitting on ad libitum food intake and spontaneous physical activity (PA) levels in healthy children and youth. A total of twenty healthy youth (twelve males and eight females) aged 10-14 years, with a mean BMI of 18·6 (sd 4·3) kg/m², were exposed to three experimental conditions in a random order: (1) a day of uninterrupted sitting (Sedentary); (2) a day of sitting interrupted with a 2 min light-intensity walk break every 20 min (Breaks); (3) a day of sitting interrupted with a 2 min light-intensity walk break every 20 min as well as 2 × 20 min of moderate-intensity PA (Breaks+PA). Food intake (ad libitum buffet meal) and PA (accelerometry for 24 h) were assessed following exposure to each experimental condition. Despite significant differences in sedentary behaviour and activity levels during the three in-laboratory sessions (all P< 0·01), we did not observe any differences in ad libitum food intake immediately following exposure to each experimental condition or any changes in the levels of sedentary behaviour or PA in the 24 h following exposure to each experimental condition (all P>0·25). These findings suggest that children and youth may not compensate for an imposed bout of sedentary behaviour by reducing subsequent food intake or increasing PA levels.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".