The face of emerging physical activity promotion initiatives across the country: Something for everyone, everywhere
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite evidence-based physical activity recommendations, and overwhelming evidence that physical inactivity is linked to many chronic diseases only 15% of Canadians meet recommended physical activity levels and participation rates among special populations such as those with chronic conditions, the elderly and those with disabilities are even lower. The burden of inactivity in Canada is clear and implementing effective programs to promote physical activity is a public health priority. In light of this, researchers, exercise professionals, and increasingly health care providers have taken up this challenge, with innovative programs and initiatives across the country. This integrated symposium brings together experts in behaviour change, nutrition, and health care delivery to discuss the design, implementation and evaluation of emerging physical activity promotion programs across Canada including those at the regional, provincial and national level. Specifically, five separate physical activity promotion initiatives will be discussed including Exercise is Medicine Canada, Igniting Fitness Possibilities for youth with disabilities, Small Steps for Big Changes for those with prediabetes, Prescription to Get Active, and Healthy Eating and Active Living for Diabetes in Primary Care Networks. Initial evidence suggest that these action-oriented, community-based initiatives are making a difference for participating individuals and the health care professionals delivering the interventions including changes in perceptions and physical activity behaviours. These symposium presentations will highlight the ongoing evolution of the integration of physical activity promotion within the broader approach to health care including the successes and ongoing challenges with implementation of physical activity promotion programs for everyone, everywhere.
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 | 0.037 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.024 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.022 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.015 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.016 |
| 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".