Comparison of Physical Activity in Male and Female Children: Does Maturation Matter?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To investigate whether observed differences in physical activity levels in boys and girls are confounded by biological age differences particularly during the circumpubertal years. METHODS: The physical activity questionnaire for children (PAQ-C) was administered biannually or triannually to 138 (70 boys; 68 girls) Canadian children for seven consecutive years from 1991 to 1997. Participants were 9-18 yr of age. Anthropometric measurements were taken biannually and age at peak height velocity (PHV) determined. Biological age was defined as years from PHV. The data were analyzed using t-tests and random effects models. RESULTS: Level of physical activity decreased with increasing chronological age in both sexes. When aligned on chronological age bands, boys had statistically significantly higher PAQ-C summary scores than girls from 10 through 16 yr of age (P < 0.05). However, when aligned on biological age, sex differences were not apparent, except at 3 yr before PHV. Random effects models of individual growth patterns confirmed these findings. CONCLUSION: Physical activity decreased with increasing chronological age in boys and girls. There were no sex differences in the longitudinal pattern of physical activity when the confounding effects of biological age were controlled except at 3 yr before PHV.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".