Physical Activity, Aerobic Fitness and Body Composition among Students in Malaysia and Libya
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to compare the physical activity (PA), exercise time and Body Composition, Body Mass Index (BMI), % Body fat (%BF) and aerobic fitness (VO2max) among students in the Faculty of Education UKM Malaysia and Faculty of Education Sabha University Libya (SUL). Respondents drawn from both faculties of education of the two institutions were of average age between 18-25 years. Four-site skinfold thicknesses and Queen’s College Step Test (QCT) were used to determine the percentage body fat (%BF) and aerobic fitness (VO2max) respectively. Physical activity pattern and health status were also assessed by means of the seven days activity of self-reported questionnaire. The study showed a significant difference in terms of moderate (8.59 hrs/wk, 7.48 hrs/wk; t=-3.3, p=.001) and vigorous (4.3 hrs/wk, 6.3 hrs/wk; (t= -7.7, p= .000) time spent in exercising. This also similar with scores for BMI (SUL: m = 22.2; UKM: m = 24.4) and %BF (SUL: m = 13.6%; UKM: m = 16.3%) among students of both SUL (Libya) and UKM (Malaysia). However, analyses revealed that there was no significant difference in VO2max between student-teachers of SUL and UKM (t= -.99, p = .324). This study concludes that participants score an above average of 44 ml.kg -¹ .min -¹ that are considered as being in good fitness and good health. Although SUL students scored lower BMI and less %BF than participants from UKM who reported engaging more time in vigorous physical activity, SUL participants spent significant time in moderate exercises. Lifestyle among student-teachers of UKM Malaysia and SUL Libya did not differ in terms of aerobic fitness but showed significant influence of moderate exercises towards BMI and %BF as for Libyan participants spent more time in moderate activities like walking and gardening.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".