The Utility of Physical Activity Micro-Grants: The ParticipACTION Teen Challenge Program
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Youth physical activity levels remain low in Canada and worldwide. Lack of environmental resources (e.g., access to equipment and facilities, transportation options, and participation costs) is a key barrier for youth participation. Micro-grants are small budgets of money awarded via grant applications and may help community organizations facilitate youth physical activity participation by alleviating environmental resource barriers. ParticipACTION Teen Challenge was a national micro-grant scheme administered in Canada. Secondary analysis of survey data from Provincial and Territorial coordinators, registered community organizers, and successful grant applicants were used to evaluate the process and outcomes of Teen Challenge. Results showed that the financial subsidy of 500CAD was used mainly toward equipment, instruction, and transportation. Coordinators and community organizers indicated high levels of satisfaction and benefits for communities and teens. A key benefit for coordinators was leveraging the Teen Challenge network for physical activity promotion. Reported benefits for teenaged participants included leadership opportunities (e.g., helping create and implement programs) and increased physical activity participation. Findings highlight the value of micro-grants for supporting sport and physical activity opportunities for Canadian teens, and show that such schemes address barriers related to environmental resources. The sustainability of micro-grant schemes remains to be seen.
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 | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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".