Perspectives on exercise participation among Canadian university students
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: University has been identified as an important time to develop exercise habits. The aim of this study was to examine factors that enhanced exercise participation among a diverse set of undergraduate students and their perceived facilitators as well as barriers to exercising regularly. Setting: A large public university in one of the largest and most ethno-culturally diverse regions of Canada. Method: A mixed-methods design was employed to examine factors associated with regular exercise participation among diverse Canadian undergraduate students ( N = 477). Survey data were analysed using logistic regression analyses to predict regular exercise participation. In addition, six focus group sessions explored barriers and facilitators to regular engagement in exercise ( n = 41). Results: Survey findings indicated that being male, having a parent that attended college, and religious affiliation were predictive of exercising regularly. Thematic analysis of qualitative findings highlighted the complex roles that religion, intimidation, peer support and priority-setting played in college students’ exercise participation. Conclusion: Findings can inform ongoing strategies to promote exercise participation in early adulthood, particularly among diverse college students.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 it