Understanding parent perceptions of healthy physical activity for their child with a chronic medical condition: A cross-sectional study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: We sought to determine the prevalence of, and identify factors associated with, parent questions about physical activity for their child with a chronic cardiac, respiratory, or rheumatologic condition. METHODS: This cross-sectional study of 56 children (32 [57%] female), 3 to 18 years of age, with chronic cardiac (n=21), respiratory (n=18), or rheumatologic (n=17) conditions involved a parent questionnaire about their child's physical activity participation and measurement of the child's activity with an omni-directional accelerometer for 1 week. RESULTS: Parents of 20 (36%) children had at least one question about their child's physical activity participation, and the prevalence of questions did not vary by age (Wald chi square = 0.77, P=0.38), gender (Wald chi square = 0.11, P=0.74), or clinic (Wald chi square = 1.77, P=0.41). Parent questions were associated (P = 0.04) with lower levels of activity for boys (95% confidence interval [CI] for estimated marginal means: With questions: 197, 395; Without questions: 346, 500) and higher levels of activity for girls (95% CI for estimated marginal means: With questions: 268, 448; Without questions: 239, 369). A multivariable logistic regression model found that parents with questions had higher odds of having a child who was less well (odds ratio [OR]=19.9 for unwell, OR=5.6 for generally well with some symptoms versus well and asymptomatic) and had a history of cardiac arrhythmia (OR=7.6). CONCLUSIONS: Over one-third of parents reported having questions about physical activity for their child with a chronic medical condition, suggesting substantial uncertainty even among children reported as active. Presence of parent uncertainty is associated with parent reports of the child being unwell or a history of cardiac arrhythmia. By asking parents if they have questions about their child's activity, health care professionals may be better able to identify inactive boys and overprotective attitudes toward active girls.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".