MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2291334321

Daily physical education in primary school and physical activity in midlife: the Trois-Rivières study.

2015· article· en· W2291334321 on OpenAlexaffabout
Richard Larouche, Louis Laurencelle, Roy J. Shephard, F. Trudeau

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPhysical Education and Pedagogy
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychological interventionPromotion (chess)Physical activityGerontologyPsychologyPhysical educationHealth promotionPurpose in lifeSocial supportLongitudinal studyMedicineDevelopmental psychologyPhysical therapyClinical psychologyPublic healthSocial psychologyNursingPedagogy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIM: Although a commonly stated purpose of physical education (PE) classes is to foster life-long participation in physicalactivity (PA), few longitudinal studies have assessed the impact of childhood PE interventions on PA as an adult. The Trois-Rivières Growth and Development Study provided a unique opportunity to address this question. METHODS: In 2008, 86 participants in the original 1970-1977 Trois-Rivières Study (44 women and 42 men aged 44.0 ± 1.2 years) completed a questionnaire examining their current PA level and different correlates of PA (i.e. individual's intention to engage in PA, perceived enjoyment, usefulness and ease in engaging in PA, perceived social support and social norms). Participants had initially been assigned to either an experimental program (5 h/week of specialist-taught PE) or a control group (40 min/week of home-room teacher-taught PE) from grades 1 to 6. RESULTS: There were no current differences between the experimental and control groups neither in the frequency, duration nor volume of PA undertaken at the current follow-up. Furthermore, no differences between groups were found for any of the PA correlates examined. CONCLUSION: Providing daily PE throughout primary school seems insufficient to ensure that individuals will remain active in midlife. The development of a life-course approach to PA promotion is thus warranted.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.892
Threshold uncertainty score0.215

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.101
GPT teacher head0.434
Teacher spread0.333 · 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

Citations5
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicPhysical Education and PedagogyFrench-language works237,207