The Effectiveness Of In Motion Schools On Physical Activity Levels Of Elementary School Age Children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Physical activity (PA) is critical for attaining optimal health, social, environmental and economic benefits. It has been suggested that forming partnerships with schools, families, communities and workplaces is critical to enhancing the health of children. Saskatchewan in motion is a province-wide initiative which has built such alliances in its effort to increase PA for individuals of all ages, including child and youth populations. Schools that adopt the in motion strategy are committed to providing a minimum of 30 minutes of PA every day for every student. PURPOSE: To examine the impact of the in motion schools initiative on PA levels of students. METHODS: Five schools within the province of Saskatchewan, Canada participated in the study, which included a total of 228 students in grades 4, 6, and 8. One urban (n=72) and two rural schools (n=50) participated in the in motion initiative while the remaining urban (n=53) and rural (n=53) schools served as the comparison group. The PAQ-C was used to assess self-reported PA and data were collected at the beginning (September) and the end (May) of the school year. In motion schools implemented the 30-minute PA initiative following the first data collection while non-in motion schools did not change their regular PA regimes. Compliance to the in motion initiative was assessed using teacher records and logs. RESULTS: Overall, PA scores increased among students in in motion schools (p<.05) but remained unchanged among those in non-in motion schools. When stratified by gender, the increase in PA scores in the in motion classrooms was significant for males (p<.05) but not females. There were no differences in PA scores between urban and rural schools in either the in motion or non-in motion classrooms. CONCLUSION: The results suggest that the in motion initiative was effective at increasing PA levels among students, regardless of whether they were enrolled in a rural or urban in motion school. However, further research is needed to examine why the in motion intervention was more effective in engaging male students in PA and to further identify potential barriers to engaging female youth in PA.:
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".