MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2155128498 · doi:10.1186/1479-5868-8-78

How many steps/day are enough? for children and adolescents

2011· review· en· W2155128498 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity · 2011
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPhysical Activity and Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaCanadian Fitness and Lifestyle Research Institute
FundersArnold School of Public Health, University of South CarolinaUniversity of South AustraliaPublic Health Agency of CanadaPublic Health AgencyUniversity of South CarolinaUniversity of AlbertaDublin City UniversityUniversity of Tennessee, KnoxvilleUniversiteit GentKarolinska InstitutetAuckland University of Technology, New Zealand
KeywordsPhysical activityNormativeMedicinePublic healthCadenceBehavioural sciencesAmbulatoryClinical nutritionCredibilityPedometerPhysical therapyDemographyPsychologyGerontologyPhysical medicine and rehabilitation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Worldwide, public health physical activity guidelines include special emphasis on populations of children (typically 6-11 years) and adolescents (typically 12-19 years). Existing guidelines are commonly expressed in terms of frequency, time, and intensity of behaviour. However, the simple step output from both accelerometers and pedometers is gaining increased credibility in research and practice as a reasonable approximation of daily ambulatory physical activity volume. Therefore, the purpose of this article is to review existing child and adolescent objectively monitored step-defined physical activity literature to provide researchers, practitioners, and lay people who use accelerometers and pedometers with evidence-based translations of these public health guidelines in terms of steps/day. In terms of normative data (i.e., expected values), the updated international literature indicates that we can expect 1) among children, boys to average 12,000 to 16,000 steps/day and girls to average 10,000 to 13,000 steps/day; and, 2) adolescents to steadily decrease steps/day until approximately 8,000-9,000 steps/day are observed in 18-year olds. Controlled studies of cadence show that continuous MVPA walking produces 3,300-3,500 steps in 30 minutes or 6,600-7,000 steps in 60 minutes in 10-15 year olds. Limited evidence suggests that a total daily physical activity volume of 10,000-14,000 steps/day is associated with 60-100 minutes of MVPA in preschool children (approximately 4-6 years of age). Across studies, 60 minutes of MVPA in primary/elementary school children appears to be achieved, on average, within a total volume of 13,000 to 15,000 steps/day in boys and 11,000 to 12,000 steps/day in girls. For adolescents (both boys and girls), 10,000 to 11,700 may be associated with 60 minutes of MVPA. Translations of time- and intensity-based guidelines may be higher than existing normative data (e.g., in adolescents) and therefore will be more difficult to achieve (but not impossible nor contraindicated). Recommendations are preliminary and further research is needed to confirm and extend values for measured cadences, associated speeds, and MET values in young people; continue to accumulate normative data (expected values) for both steps/day and MVPA across ages and populations; and, conduct longitudinal and intervention studies in children and adolescents required to inform the shape of step-defined physical activity dose-response curves associated with various health parameters.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.987
Threshold uncertainty score0.943

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.110
GPT teacher head0.411
Teacher spread0.300 · 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