Social correlates of leisure-time sedentary behaviours in Canadian adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Research on the correlates of sedentary behaviour among adults is needed to design health interventions to modify this behaviour. This study explored the associations of social correlates with leisure-time sedentary behaviour of Canadian adults, and whether these associations differ between different types of sedentary behaviour. A sample of 12,021 Canadian adults was drawn from the 2012 Canadian Community Health Survey, and analyzed using binary logistic regression to model the relationships that marital status, the presence of children in the household, and social support have with overall time spent sitting, using a computer, playing video games, watching television, and reading during leisure time. Covariates included gender, age, education, income, employment status, perceived health, physical activity level, body mass index (BMI), and province or territory of residence. Extensive computer time was primarily negatively related to being in a common law relationship, and primarily positively related to being single/never married. Being single/never married was positively associated with extensive sitting time in men only. Having children under 12 in the household was protective against extensive video game and reading times. Increasing social support was negatively associated with extensive computer time in men and women, while among men increasing social support was positively associated with extensive sitting time. Computer, video game, television, and reading time have unique correlates among Canadian adults. Marital status, the presence of children in the household, and social support should be considered in future analyses of sedentary activities in adults.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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 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".