Prevalence and Correlates of Physical Activity Within On-Reserve First Nations Youth
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Youth in Canada age 5-17 years require a minimum of 60 minutes of moderate to vigorous physical activity (PA) everyday. Regrettably, there are no published studies on levels of PA within on-reserve First Nations youth in Canada that use validated surveys. The objective was to determine what percentage of Saskatoon Tribal Council (STC) First Nations on-reserve youth met the Canadian Society for Exercise and Physiology's (CSEP) definition for being physically active, and what influences are associated with meeting this standard. METHODS: Students in grades 5-8 within the STC were asked to complete a youth health survey. RESULTS: Only 7.4% of STC youth met CSEP's PA standard. Male youth (13.9%) were more likely to meet the PA standard than female youth (4.1%). Having parents who watch youth participate and who provide transportation to classes, having enough equipment at home, having friends bike or walk to school, participating in physical activity headed by a coach or instructor, and participating in structured classes are associated with meeting the standard. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of meeting the PA standard among on-reserve First Nations youth is very low. More research is needed to identify independent risk indicators of being physically inactive.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".