MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2136933546 · doi:10.1139/h11-012

Canadian Sedentary Behaviour Guidelines for Children and Youth

2011· review· en· W2136933546 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Mark S. Tremblay, Allana G. LeBlanc, Ian Janssen, Michelle E. Kho, Audrey L. Hicks, Kelly Murumets, Rachel C. Colley, Mary Duggan

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Physiology Nutrition and Metabolism · 2011
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPhysical Activity and Health
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityAgricultural Research Institute of OntarioImpactCanadian Society for Exercise PhysiologyQueen's University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsGuidelineContext (archaeology)RecreationScreen timeLimitingMedicineSittingGeneral partnershipGerontologyPsychologyMedical educationPhysical therapyPolitical sciencePhysical activityGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Canadian Society for Exercise Physiology (CSEP), in partnership with the Healthy Active Living and Obesity Research Group (HALO) at the Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario Research Institute, and in collaboration with ParticipACTION, and others, has developed the Canadian Sedentary Behaviour Guidelines for Children (aged 5-11 years) and Youth (aged 12-17 years). The guidelines include a preamble to provide context, followed by the specific recommendations for sedentary behaviour. The entire development process was guided by the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research Evaluation (AGREE) II instrument, which is the international standard for clinical practice guideline development. Thus, the guidelines have gone through a rigorous and transparent developmental process and the recommendations are based on evidence from a systematic review and interpretation of the research evidence. The final guidelines benefitted from an extensive online consultation process with 230 domestic and international stakeholders and key informants. The final guideline recommendations state that for health benefits, children (aged 5-11 years) and youth (aged 12-17 years) should minimize the time that they spend being sedentary each day. This may be achieved by (i) limiting recreational screen time to no more than 2 h per day - lower levels are associated with additional health benefits; and (ii) limiting sedentary (motorized) transport, extended sitting time, and time spent indoors throughout the day. These are the first evidence-based Canadian Sedentary Behaviour Guidelines for Children and Youth and provide important and timely recommendations for the advancement of public health based on a systematic synthesis, interpretation, and application of the current scientific evidence.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.032
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.057
Threshold uncertainty score0.324

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.032
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.004
Bibliometrics0.0090.010
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0070.002
Research integrity0.0030.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.006

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.

Opus teacher head0.105
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.257 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations556
Published2011
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied Physiology Nutrition and MetabolismSame topicPhysical Activity and HealthFrench-language works237,207