Y Kids Academy Program Increases Knowledge of Healthy Living in Young Adolescents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: It is well established that physical activity levels decline during adolescence.To address this problem, a program called the Y Kids Academy was developed to improve young adolescents' knowledge of healthy lifestyles.The primary goal was to evaluate whether the program would attract participants with both high and low levels of physical literacy and to evaluate whether baseline knowledge scores were associated with physical literacy knowledge.The secondary goals were to determine whether baseline knowledge scores would increase after Y Kids Academy participation or were associated with a standardized assessment of physical literacy knowledge.Methods: Parent perceptions of their adolescent's healthy living behaviours were measured to assess the impact of Y Kids Academy participation on the family.The Canadian Assessment of Physical Literacy (CAPL) was completed pre-Academy to measure participants' physical literacy.Participants and parents also completed questionnaires pre-and post-Academy to assess change in healthy living knowledge and perception of the child's healthy living behaviours, respectively.163 children (mean age of 11.1 ± 0.8) consented to participate (73 female, 45%). Results:The mean total CAPL score of participants was not significantly different (p=.07) from the mean total CAPL score measured among 3000 Canadian children.The largest proportion of participants (53.3%) were categorized as progressing, similar to the Canadian population (53.2%).Knowledge scores for the Y Kids Academy evaluation were significantly associated with physical literacy knowledge (r = 0.40, p < 0.001).Mean knowledge scores increased significantly (p<0.001) from pre-Academy (10.4 ± 5.4) to post-academy (12.7±6.5).There was no change in parent reported healthy living behaviours (p=0.41). Conclusions:The Y Kids Academy program was successful at attracting youth with lower physical literacy in a proportion similar to the Canadian population.These findings support the suitability of the Y Kids Academy for improving and evaluating knowledge of healthy living in young adolescents.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".