Relationship between Academic Performance with Physical, Psychosocial, Lifestyle, and Sociodemographic Factors in Female Undergraduate Students
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship between physical, psychosocial, lifestyle and sociodemographic factors with academic performance in female undergraduate students. Methods: One hundred undergraduate female students from the Faculty of Science at the University of Quebec at Montreal participated in this study (mean age = 24.4 ± 4.6 years old). All participants provided their university transcript and had to complete at least 45 course credits from their bachelor degree. Body composition (DXA), handgrip strength, estimated maximal oxygen consumption (VO 2 max) (Bruce Protocol) and blood pressure were measured. Participants also completed a questionnaire on their psychosocial, academic motivation, lifestyle and sociodemographic profile. Results: Significant correlations were observed between GPA with estimated VO 2 max ( r = 0.32), intrinsic motivation toward knowledge ( r = 0.23), intrinsic motivation toward accomplishment ( r = 0.27) and external regulation ( r = -0.30, P = 0.002). In addition, eating breakfast every morning and being an atheist was positively associated with academic performance ( P < 0.05). Finally, a stepwise linear regression analysis showed that external regulation, intrinsic motivation toward accomplishment, VO 2 max levels and eating a daily breakfast explained 28.5 % of the variation in the GPA in our cohort. Conclusions: Results of the present study indicate that motivational, physical and lifestyle factors appear to be predictors of academic performance in female undergraduate students.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".