Results From Wales’ 2016 Report Card on Physical Activity for Children and Youth: Is Wales Turning the Tide on Children’s Inactivity?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This is the second Active Healthy Kids Wales Report Card. The 2016 version consolidates and translates research related to physical activity (PA) among children and youth in Wales, and aims to raise the awareness of children's engagement in PA and sedentary behaviors. METHODS: Ten PA indicators were graded using the Active Healthy Kids-Canada Report Card methodology involving a synthesis and expert consensus of the best available evidence. RESULTS: Grades were assigned as follows: Overall PA, D+; Organized Sport Participation, C; Active and Outdoor Play, C; Active Transportation, C; Sedentary Behaviors, D-; Physical Literacy, INC; Family and Peer Influences, D+; School, B; Community and the Built Environment, C; and National Government Policy, Strategies, and Investments, B-. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the existence of sound policies, programs, and infrastructure, PA levels of children and youth in Wales are one of the lowest and sedentary behavior one of the highest globally. From the 2014 Report Card, the Family and Peer Influences grade improved from D to D+, whereas Community and the Built Environment dropped from B to C. These results indicate that a concerted effort is required to increase PA and decrease sedentary time in children and young people in Wales.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".