<i>Physical Activity, Aerobic Fitness, Self-Perception, and Dietary Intake</i>in At Risk of Overweight and Normal Weight Children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Differences in physical activity, aerobic fitness, self-perception, and dietary intake were examined in a sample of six- to ten-year-olds at risk of overweight, and in normal weight boys and girls. Participants (n=20 at risk of overweight [BMI > or =85th percentile]; n=115 normal weight [BMI <85th percentile]; n=68 boys; n=67 girls) had anthropometric, physical activity, aerobic fitness, self-perception, and dietary intake measurements at zero, three, six, and 12 months. Over the 12-month period, normal weight children were more physically active (F=4.1, p<0.05) and aerobically fit (F=14.3, p<0.001), and possessed higher self-perceptions of social acceptance (F=7.3, p<0.01) than their at risk of overweight peers. Fitness differences between the sexes were not apparent at baseline, but emerged over the long term (F=7.9, p<0.01). Overall, boys consumed more total energy, fat, carbohydrate, and protein than did girls, while the entire sample consumed diets low in vegetables and fruits and meat and alternatives, and high in "other" foods. These observations highlight key disparities in lifestyle-related behaviours and perceptions between groups of children according to overweight status and sex. The findings underscore the importance of longitudinal studies in youth because cross-sectional studies may reflect transient differences.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".