Adolescents’ Relationship between Physical Education and Longitudinal Physical Activity Trends
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With physical education (PE) being an avenue to be physically active and learn about health and wellbeing, it is important to understand enrollment trends and physical activity (PA) behaviors among adolescents. The purpose of this study is to examine adolescents’ health profiles and gain an understanding of adolescents’ perspective of PE. The current study used mixed methodology to examine adolescents’ health profiles and gain understanding of their perspectives of PE. Part 1 identified relationships over a two-year period between: PE rating, physical activity (PA), and health variables using data from the National Longitudinal Survey of Children and Youth (NLSCY). Part 2 examined adolescents’ perspectives of PE through four focus groups.Overall, PE was preferred over other subjects by 78% of participants; and preferring PE predicted higher frequencies of PA, lower BMI, and higher self-esteem. Enrollment in high school PE was influenced by the environment, gender, course conflicts, and teacher influence. In summary, the majority of adolescents prefer PE; it has an influence on health, and is an avenue for PA. Continued efforts need to be made to increase PE enrollment and participation to ensure the health of young people.
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 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".