MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2924872798 · doi:10.14288/hfjc.v11i2.256

A Review of Physical Activity Status in Canadian Indigenous Populations and Current Physical Activity Guidelines and Evaluation Methods

2018· review· en· W2924872798 on OpenAlexaffabout
Yu-Shan Hsu, Darren E. R. Warburton

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Collections · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndigenous Health, Education, and Rights
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousPhysical activityPhysical fitnessGerontologyHealth benefitsMedicinePhysical therapyTraditional medicineEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reports on health and physical activity status among Indigenous Canadians have highlighted the need for community-based and Indigenous led primary and secondary prevention programs that address the needs and cultural perspectives of Indigenous people. This student driven paper summarizes the patterns of and barriers to physical activity in Indigenous populations living in Canada and discusses concerns about cultural safety and appropriateness of current physical activity guidelines and methods of physical activity evaluation. Additionally, this paper highlights seven key practices to increase the effectiveness of future initiatives designed to improve physical activity behaviours in Indigenous communities. Future considerations for physical activity assessment and functional fitness testing in Indigenous communities are also discussed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.595
Threshold uncertainty score0.806

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0130.018
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.281
GPT teacher head0.576
Teacher spread0.295 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen Collections→Same topicIndigenous Health, Education, and Rights→French-language works237,207→