Childhood Participation in After-School Activities: What is to be Expected?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Participation is recognised as a key to health and wellbeing and is considered to be a vital part of the development of children and youth. The purpose of this study was to examine the participation patterns of children and adolescents in their time outside formal school. More specifically, the influence of age and gender on after-school participation patterns was explored. Method: Three hundred and thirty-two children and adolescents (5 to 18 years old) were divided into five age groups and completed the Children's Assessment of Participation and Enjoyment (CAPE). To test the interaction effect of gender and age on participation measures, ANOVAs were conducted. Results: The results indicated differences with moderate to high effect size in participation patterns across age, where a decline in participation was detected as children made the transition to adolescence. Differences with negligible effect size in participation were found between boys and girls in some of the activity types. No interaction effect between age and gender was observed. Conclusion: Participation patterns change with age, particularly as children make the transition to adolescence; however, this change does not depend on gender. Intervention strategies might take into account these inherent changes. Future studies might consider additional factors (for example, environment) while examining participation throughout age.
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 | 0.003 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".