Results From South Korea’s 2016 Report Card on Physical Activity for Children and Youth
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: South Korea's 2016 Report Card on Physical Activity for Children and Youth is the first assessment of physical activity according to the indicators set by Active Healthy Kids Global Alliance. METHODS: National surveys were used as preferred sources of data. This was then supported by peer-reviewed papers and government reports identified by a systematic search of the literature written in English or Korean. A Research Working Group then graded indicators based on the collected evidence. RESULTS: Each indicator was graded as follows: Overall Physical Activity, D-; Organized Sport and Physical Activity Participation, C-; Active Transport, C+; Sedentary Behavior, F; School, D; Government and Investment, C; Active Play, Physical Literacy, Family and Peers, and Community and Built Environment were graded INC (incomplete) due to lack of available evidence. CONCLUSIONS: Though the final grades of key indicators for South Korean children and youth are not satisfactory, increasing interests and investments have been demonstrated at a national level. More evidence is required for comprehensive assessment on all indicators to better inform policy and practice. This should be accompanied by the use of consistent criteria to contribute to global efforts for active healthy kids.
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 | 0.007 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.004 |
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".