Using an Analytic Framework to Identify Potential Targets and Strategies for Ecologically Based Physical Activity Interventions in Middle Schools
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
The objective was to demonstrate the value of applying an ecological analytic framework to formative data in conjunction with ecological planning frameworks (e.g., intervention mapping) to ensure a high degree of ecological program integration as illustrated through a physical activity program for students in middle school. Eight focus groups were conducted with 38 students in four schools to examine student perceptions of who or what in their school made it easy or difficult for students to be physically active. Qualitative data were used to identify potential intervention targets according to the analytic framework. Frequency analysis revealed that most identified physical activity barriers/facilitators were associated with organization (59.4%) targets. Five different intervention strategies were identified, with organizational modification being most popular. Applying the analytic framework to formative data enabled us to identify potential targets, strategies, and activities for an ecologically based physical-activity-promotion program relevant to the priority population.
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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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