An Assessment of Sedentary Time Among Undergraduate Students at a Canadian University
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
International Journal of Exercise Science 10(8): 1116-1129, 2017. The purpose of this study was to calculate a total daily sedentary time for the undergraduate population at a large urban Canadian University and investigate student perceptions of the facilitators and barriers to engaging in a less sedentary lifestyle. A sample of 335 participants responded to an online questionnaire that included the SIT-Q and open-ended questions, with 102 providing sufficient data to be included in the quantitative analysis and 145 in the qualitative analysis. Students spent an average of 11.88 ± 3.46 hrs/day engaged in sedentary behaviors. Three themes were identified as facilitators to engaging in a less sedentary lifestyle: 1) access to a gym, 2) student jobs, and 3) walking to and on campus. Two themes were identified as barriers to engaging in a less sedentary lifestyle: 1) sitting in class and 2) studying outside of class. Similar to desk-based working adults, undergraduate students have levels of sedentary behavior that warrant further investigation and intervention, perhaps most effectively within the university classroom.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it