Prevalence of University Students' Sufficient Physical Activity: A Systematic Review
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 reviewed and analyzed the prevalence of university students' participation in physical activity at the level necessary to acquire health benefits. 19 primary studies (published 1985-2001) representing a total of 35,747 students (20,179 women and 15,568 men) from a total of 27 countries (Australia, Canada, China, Germany, Nigeria, United States, and 21 European countries) are described and the amount of activity identified within each study is analyzed in accordance with the American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM) guidelines for physical activity. With respect to these guidelines, more than one-half of university students in the United States and Canada are not active enough to gain health benefits. Internationally, the same is true, although Australian students appear to have the highest level of sufficient activity (at 60%). Women, and especially African-American women, are among the least active students, and students living off-campus are more active than those on-campus. Insufficient activity is a serious health concern among university students. Appropriate interventions and tools to measure ACSM-recommended physical activity are needed.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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