The correlates of physical activity among adult Métis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Métis, with a population of close to 390,000 people, are a culturally distinct and constitutionally recognized Aboriginal group in Canada that suffers from poorer overall health than non-Aboriginal Canadians. One important predictor of good health is physical activity. Guided by frameworks based on social and Aboriginal-specific determinants, we investigated the correlates of leisure-time physical activity (LTPA) and active transportation (walking) among adult Métis, with a particular focus on how culturally specific variables were associated with these two types of activity. We also examined how demographic, geographic, socioeconomic and health-related factors were associated with physical activity. DESIGN: We used data from Statistics Canada's 2006 Aboriginal Peoples Survey and Métis Supplement to analyze the correlates of physical activity among Métis aged 20-64, using a series of logistic regression models. RESULTS: Having attended a Métis cultural event in the past year was positively associated with LTPA, as was a high level of spirituality. Similarly, those who had attended a cultural event in the last year were more likely to report a high level of active transportation. Speaking an Aboriginal language and being a member of a Métis organization were not independently associated with the two types of physical activity. Self-perceived health, being male and household income were other correlates positively associated with LTPA, whereas age, body mass index and smoking were negatively associated with this type of activity. Active transportation was positively associated with self-perceived health and being female, while negatively associated with age and body mass index. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study suggest that interventions aimed at increasing physical activity among adult Métis might be more successful if they are connected to cultural activities and spirituality. This research also suggests that demographic, socioeconomic and health-related factors are important considerations when designing initiatives to increase physical activity among adult Métis.
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".