MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2185682280 · doi:10.56421/ujslcbr.v3i0.151

The Creation and Implementation of an Electronic Exercise Prescription at an Ontario Family Health Team

2014· article· en· W2185682280 on OpenAlexaffabout
Aaron Gazendam, Erica Leanne Pascoal

Bibliographic record

VenueUndergraduate Journal of Service Learning & Community-Based Research · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPhysical Activity and Health
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKinesiologyOverweightGerontologyHealth promotionObesityMedicinePromotion (chess)Medical prescriptionGuidelineDisease preventionDiseasePhysical activityFamily medicinePhysical therapyPublic healthNursingEnvironmental healthInternal medicinePolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent evidence shows that 85% of Canadian adults do not meet the recommended physical activity (PA) guidelines set forth by the Canadian Society for Exercise Physiology (Colley et al. 2011). In Kingston, Ontario, Canada 66% of males and 50% of females are overweight or obese, which may be associated with decreased PA levels among the Kingston community as compared to previous years (Vital Signs 2012). There is unequivocal evidence regarding the importance of physical activity in the prevention of a wide variety of diseases and obesity. Regular PA is inversely related to the occurrence of obesity, cardiovascular disease, type 2 diabetes, hypertension, and other common lifestyle related diseases. CSEP’s suggested 150minutes of weekly PA is a guideline to help Canadians achieve the health benefits and disease prevention associated with regular PA (Haskell et al. 2007). At Queen’s University, located in Kingston, senior students in the School of Kinesiology and Health Studies have been given a chance to make an impact on the PA levels of Kingston residents through the Community-Based Physical Activity Promotion course. By connecting students with a community-based group or organization, the year-long course provides an opportunity for students to practically apply the theories, evidence, and skills discussed in course seminars to the promotion of community PA involvement.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.676
Threshold uncertainty score0.652

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0210.003

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 head0.096
GPT teacher head0.415
Teacher spread0.319 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUndergraduate Journal of Service Learning & Community-Based ResearchSame topicPhysical Activity and HealthFrench-language works237,207