MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2548588047 · doi:10.1177/1757913916675388

The prevalence of physical activity among the young population of UAE: a meta-analysis

2016· review· en· W2548588047 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kaissar Yammine

Bibliographic record

VenuePerspectives in Public Health · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPhysical Activity and Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuarter (Canadian coin)MedicinePhysical activityMeta-analysisInclusion (mineral)Public healthPopulationGerontologyDemographySedentary lifestyleEnvironmental healthPhysical therapyGeographyPsychologyInternal medicineNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIMS: Lack of physical activities is a key disease factor and constitutes a serious public health issue in the Middle East region. Reports from this geographical area converge in concluding that the resident populations do not get enough exercise to keep themselves healthy. The objective of this systematic review is to obtain accurate data on the prevalence of physical activity (PA) and levels of PA among the young residents of the United Arab Emirates (UAE). METHODS: Five prospective studies met the inclusion criteria with 12,988 subjects (including 12,782 adolescents). RESULTS: Meta-analytical results showed that (1) almost a quarter of the young population have a total sedentary lifestyle with no PA, (2) less than half have been mildly involved in physical activities, (3) around a fifth practised a moderate level of PA, and (4) a quarter were involved in a vigorous PA. Additionally, mild PA was more common in female adolescents, whereas moderate and high PA were significantly higher in male adolescents. CONCLUSION: Such alarming rates of exercise involvement among the young UAE residents should stimulate policymakers and college/university administrations to plan and promote PA in order to reduce future levels of chronic diseases.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0120.025
Bibliometrics0.0060.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.265
GPT teacher head0.476
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations49
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePerspectives in Public HealthSame topicPhysical Activity and HealthFrench-language works237,207