The Godin-Shephard Leisure-Time Physical Activity Questionnaire: Validity Evidence Supporting its Use for Classifying Healthy Adults into Active and Insufficiently Active Categories
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
This study provided validity evidence for the Godin-Shephard Leisure-Time Physical Activity Questionnaire (GSLTPAQ) to classify respondents into active and insufficiently active categories. Members of a fitness center [45 women and 55 men; mean (SD) age=45.5 (10.6) yr.] completed the questionnaire. Using only moderate and strenuous scores, those with a leisure score index≥24 were classified as active; those with a score≤23 were classified as insufficiently active. VO2max, percentage of body fat, and electronic records of fitness center attendance were the validation variables. In a visit to the fitness center, participants completed the GSLTPAQ and a certified exercise specialist performed a physical fitness evaluation. A multivariate analysis of covariance (MANCOVA) indicated the group of respondents classified as active had higher VO2max and lower percentage of body fat than the group of respondents classified as insufficiently active. An analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) indicated the group of respondents classified as active had higher electronic records of fitness center attendance than the group of respondents classified as insufficiently active. Therefore, these pieces of validity evidence support the use of the questionnaire's classification system among healthy adults.
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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