MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

It’s Not Just The Amount That Counts

2015· article· en· W2471792997 on OpenAlexaff
Julie Goguen Carpenter, Jennifer Brunet, Jacinthe Beauchamp, Tanya Scarapicchia, Catherine M. Sabiston, Mathieu Bélanger

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInclusion and Disability in Education and Sport
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Moncton
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCompetence (human resources)RecreationAutonomyPsychologyPsychological interventionCohortPhysical activitySocial psychologyMedicinePhysical therapyEcologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Physical activity (PA) behavior is a general construct that comprises a variety of dimensions (e.g., organised sports, exercise, free play, active transportation), and thus children reporting similar amounts of PA may have diverse types of PA involvement, motivational regulations, and experience different levels of basic psychological needs satisfaction. Identification of distinct PA profiles among children could help design more targeted interventions to promote long term maintenance of PA. PURPOSE: To identify and characterize different PA profiles among active children. METHODS: A purposeful sub-sample of active children enrolled in the Monitoring Activities of Teenagers to Comprehend their Habits (MATCH) cohort study were interviewed. Open-ended questions focused on (1) their experiences within PA, (2) their satisfaction of autonomy, competence and relatedness, and (3) motivation for PA. All [n=25; mean age=12.2 (0.6) years; 48% female] were pre-identified as consistently engaging in at least 60 minutes of moderate-to-vigorous PA per day. Interview data were transcribed verbatim and coded independently by three researchers. RESULTS: Content analysis led to the identification of five distinct PA profiles: specialists, regulars, explorers, outdoor enthusiasts, and accidentally actives. In a cross-profile analysis, preferred types of PA, commitment toward PA, variety in types of PA practiced, and contexts in which PA is practiced (e.g., organised vs unstructured, competitive vs recreational, outdoors vs indoors) were themes that distinguished the profiles. Participants in these profiles were also distinguishable based on their motivation for PA and variations across satisfaction of competence, autonomy, and relatedness. CONCLUSIONS: This study has gone beyond past research that focuses only on total amount of PA and shown that active children can present different PA profiles. Considering that PA levels decrease with age, recognising distinct PA profiles and their associated characteristics may help tailor interventions to these PA profiles, and in turn help children maintain PA participation. Specific interventions could be guided by principles outlined in youth sport development frameworks and the self-determination theory given that each profile presented unique aspects associated with these theories.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.008
Scholarly communication0.0100.014
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.005

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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.378
Teacher spread0.308 · 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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicine & Science in Sports & ExerciseSame topicInclusion and Disability in Education and SportFrench-language works237,207