Association of Park Size, Distance, and Features With Physical Activity in Neighborhood Parks
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
OBJECTIVES: We studied whether park size, number of features in the park, and distance to a park from participants' homes were related to a park being used for physical activity. METHODS: We collected observational data on 28 specific features from 33 parks. Adult residents in surrounding areas (n=380) completed 7-day physical activity logs that included the location of their activities. We used logistic regression to examine the relative importance of park size, features, and distance to participants' homes in predicting whether a park was used for physical activity, with control for perceived neighborhood safety and aesthetics. RESULTS: Parks with more features were more likely to be used for physical activity; size and distance were not significant predictors. Park facilities were more important than were park amenities. Of the park facilities, trails had the strongest relationship with park use for physical activity. CONCLUSIONS: Specific park features may have significant implications for park-based physical activity. Future research should explore these factors in diverse neighborhoods and diverse parks among both younger and older populations.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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