Combined Physical Activity/Sedentary Behavior Associations With Indices of Adiposity in 8- to 10-Year-Old Children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Individuals may achieve high physical activity (PA) yet also be highly sedentary (SED). This study assessed adiposity in children classified by PA/SED groups. METHODS: Participants were 520 8- to 10-year-old children with ≥ 1 obese parent. Moderate-to-vigorous PA (MVPA) and SED were measured by accelerometer, and screen-time was measured by self-report. Height, weight, waist circumference (WC), body fat percentage (BF%), and VO2peak were objectively measured; energy intake was measured by dietary recall. Elevated adiposity was defined as BMI ≥ 85th percentile, WC ≥ 90th percentile, BF% ≥ 85th percentile, or waist-to-height ratio (WHR) ≥ 0.5. RESULTS: Up to 27% of boys and 15% of girls were active/SED. Adiposity was lowest for active/non-SED, highest for inactive/SED, and intermediate and similar for active/SED and inactive/non-SED. Using 60 min/d MVPA and 2 h/d screen-time cut-offs, prevalence ranges for elevated adiposity in the active/non-SED, active/SED, inactive/non-SED, and inactive/SED groups were 0% to 14%, 15% to 44%, 16% to 40%, and 32% to 51%, respectively. Corresponding odds and 95% confidence intervals of being overweight/obese for the latter groups were 3.8 (95% CI, 1.7-8.4), 3.8 (1.8-8.2), and 4.9 (2.3-10.3) versus active/non-SED. PA/SED-adiposity associations were mediated by fitness but not energy intake. CONCLUSIONS: Combined PA/SED levels are strongly associated with adiposity in children, but associations are mediated by fitness. Active children who accumulate >2 h/d of screen time and inactive children are equally likely to be overweight/obese.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".