Adherence to Canadian physical activity and sedentary behaviour guidelines among children 2 to 13 years of age
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Active living is relevant for healthy child development and disease prevention. In 2011-2012 new Canadian Physical Activity and Sedentary Behaviour Guidelines were developed for children under four and 5-17 years of age. This cross-sectional study assessed children's adherence to the national guidelines, using a large sample of Alberta children ages 2-4 and 5-13 years in 2013. The proportions of children achieving the average daily duration of physical activity and screen time recommended were determined, and child and parental predictors of non-achievement were identified. Participants were 631 parent and child dyads. Data were collected by parental reports of physical activity and screen time during weekdays, and analysed using univariate and multivariate techniques (p < 0.05). Logistic regression models were used to examine factors associated with children's non-achievement of physical activity and screen time recommendations while adjusting for covariates. Sixty-two percent of children aged 2-4 and 26% of children aged 5-13 did not meet physical activity time recommendations, and 64% of children aged 2-4 and 23% of children aged 5-13 exceeded the maximum screen time recommendation. Several associations between parental age and education with non-achievement were observed but associations were not consistent across age groups or behaviours. Among preschoolers, those with middle-age parents were more likely to not achieve physical activity recommendations. Evidence of high non-achievement of the recommendations among children 2-4 years highlights the need for increased programming targeting preschool children. Further research is required to identify modifiable risk factors that may inform future health promotion efforts.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".