Physical literacy and its measurement as foundation for physical activity-promoting health promotion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The number of physical inactive people and resulting chronic diseases is one of the major public health problems in Europe. Literature indicates that many inactive people have never learned how to move appropriately and confidently. Physical Literacy (PL) should enable people with basic physical activity skills to move properly and with pleasure so that they can actively contribute to their health throughout their life. The aim of this work was to identify definitions, measurement tools and practical examples regarding PL as foundation for a physical activity-promoting health promotion. A review using PubMed, ScienceDirect and Medline was conducted. Literature in English or German published in the EU, Canada, USA, Australia and New Zealand from 2000 - 2015 was included. Additionally, a selective search in libraries and on the internet was done. 20 articles and 35 sources of grey literature were identified. After an analysis of various definitions a new definition of PL was generated: PL as a holistic concept contains the motivation, the confidence, fundamental movement skills and the knowledge and understanding that is necessary for moving effectively, creatively, confidently and with enthusiasm in a wide range of situations and environments throughout the life course so that participation in physical activities can be maintained until old age. Other key elements are the ability to make healthy, physical activity-regarding decisions in coordination with the environment, the connection with age, talent and culture, the philosophical background, the benefits as well as the development of PL. Three Canadian tools for assessing PL in children were identified, but no tools for adults. PL-promoting programs could be found in 6 countries, however they were also mostly targeted at young people. The identified principles of PL should be integrated in the applied health promotion. Furthermore measurement tools and projects in practice should be developed for adults. Key messages: Physical literacy is an important concept in promoting physical activity among people of all ages Need for research remains concerning measurement tools and practice projects targeting at 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 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 | 0.013 | 0.042 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".