MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2809485114 · doi:10.15760/nwjte.2012.10.1.14

Physical Activity during Full-Day and Half-Day Kindergarten

2012· article· en· W2809485114 on OpenAlexafffund
Lauren Talley, Ryan Cook, Patti-Jean Naylor, Viviene A. Temple

Bibliographic record

VenueNorthwest Journal of Teacher Education · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChildren's Physical and Motor Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPhysical activitySedentary behaviorDay to dayPsychologyPhysical therapyDevelopmental psychologyMedicineDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this study was to compare the physical activity levels of children during fullday and half-day kindergarten. Of the 47 children who participated in this study, 22 (girls = 50%) attended full-day kindergarten and 25 (girls = 40%) attended half-days. Actigraph activity monitors were used to assess physical activity and sedentary behavior of the children. We found that children were more active during full-day kindergarten. The rates of light-intensity physical activity were significantly higher during full-day kindergarten. However, levels of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) were quite low, and efforts to promote MVPA would be beneficial.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.298
Threshold uncertainty score0.493

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.287 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNorthwest Journal of Teacher EducationSame topicChildren's Physical and Motor DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207