Physical Activity Promotion Among Underserved Adolescents: “Make It Fun, Easy, and Popular”
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is a paucity of studies regarding noncurricular physical activity promotion interventions among adolescents, and even less such research pertaining to underserved youth. This article describes the development and implementation of a noncurricular, school-based physical activity promotion program designed for a multiethnic, underserved population of adolescents. The program's impact on leisure-time physical activity (LTPA) and on physical activity enjoyment (PAE) is also presented. The 16-week program, named FunAction, utilizes social marketing principles. Control (n = 90) and intervention (n = 131) students are assessed pre- and postintervention for levels of LTPA and PAE. Results indicate that although the program did not contribute to an increase in LTPA or PAE among intervention group students, participation in the program was elevated. This study offers preliminary evidence that noncurricular physical activity promotion programs that apply social marketing principles can be effective in engaging multiethnic, underserved adolescents in physical activity.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".