Pubertal development, physical activity, and sedentary behavior among South Korean adolescents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Sex differences in physical activity (PA) and sedentary behavior (SB) are well-established. However, recent research suggested that variations in pubertal development may explain sex differences in PA and SB among adolescents. Objective: This study examined whether pubertal development mediates the relationship between sex and PA, and SB respectively. Methods: The 2012 Korea Youth Risk Behavior Web-based Survey included data from 74,186 students in grades 7 to 12 (mean age = 14.94 ± 1.8; 48.5% girls). Pubertal development was indicated by the year in which the student reported they had experienced menarche for girls and semenarche for boys. Testing for mediation involved a bootstrapping resampling approach with self-reported PA and SB as criterion variables and taking into account covariates (chronological age, body mass index, school type, household income, and parental education). Results: Boys engaged in PA more frequently (3.30 ± 2.1 vs. 2.29 ± 1.7 day/week) and spent less time in SB (2.75 ± 1.2 vs. 2.93 ± 1.2 hr/day) than girls. Direct effects were found between sex and PA (β = -0.58 ± .01; p < .05), and sex and SB (β = 0.17 ± 0.01; p < .05). Pubertal development did not significantly mediate the relationship between sex and PA (β = 0.00; bias-corrected 95% confidence interval [BC 95% CI] [-0.01, 0.01]). Though pubertal development significantly mediated the association between sex and SB, the effect was small (β = 0.01; BC 95% CI [0.00, 0.02]). Conclusions: Sex appears to be an important predictor of PA and SB. Nonetheless, it is most likely that a combination of individual (e.g., psychological, biological) and sociocultural factors contribute to adolescents' movement behavior.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".