MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2066267824 · doi:10.1139/h00-028

Canadian Musculoskeletal Fitness Norms

2000· article· en· W2066267824 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Applied Physiology · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChildren's Physical and Motor Development
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysical fitnessTrunkVertical jumpGrip strengthCurl (programming language)DemographyPhysical therapyPopulationBody mass indexNormativeJumpMedicinePhysical medicine and rehabilitationPsychologyComputer scienceBiologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this report is to provide representative norms for measurements of musculoskeletal fitness (partial curl-ups, vertical jump, and leg power) for which Canadian norms are not currently available. Partial curl-ups, vertical jump, trunk flexion (sit and reach), grip strength, muscular endurance (push-ups), body mass index, and subcutaneous adiposity (sum of five skinfolds) were assessed, and leg power was calculated in 571 self-reportedly healthy participants (312 females and 259 males) aged 15-69 yr. The representativeness of the sample was confirmed by statistically comparing the fitness characteristics of the participants in the present study to those in the Canada Fitness Survey of 1981 and the Campbell's Survey of 1988. Normative data for partial curl-ups, vertical jump, and leg power were generated for males and females in six age groups (15-19, 20-29, 30-39, 40-49, 50-59, 60-69) for use in fitness appraisal protocols for the Canadian 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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.740
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0210.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.221 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it