An Overview of Scientific-Based Knowledge on Sedentary Behaviour Among the Pediatric Population - A Conceptual Model Development
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sedentary behaviour has been identified as a specifically deleterious personal practice on multiple levels of health of individuals at all ages, including the pediatric population (i.e., 0 to 18 years of age). The aims of this paper are to (i) summarize the literature con-cerning the definition, the characteristics, the context, the determinants, and the conse-quences of sedentary behaviour among children and youth; (ii) propose a conceptual model that summarizes these findings; and (iii) highlight research gaps in the literature. Sedentary behaviours are common and complex behaviours that can potentially affect the health of children and youth on the physiological and psychological levels. Those deleterious effects on health can vary depending on how they are accumulated through-out the day, for example with or without interruption, or in which context. While child-hood engagement in sedentary behaviours is too high in the majority of countries where it has been assessed, developing research and policies that target the reduction of seden-tary behaviours among children and youth must be ranked as a top priority for all public health organizations worldwide. Although further research is needed concerning the identification of the specific determinants and consequences of different types and pat-terns of sedentary behaviours in various contexts, the Conceptual Model for the Study and Understanding of Children and Youth’s Sedentary Behaviour, gives an overview of the topic and supports the development of policy and further research.
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 | 0.010 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".