GRADE-ADOLOPMENT Process to Develop 24-Hour Movement Behavior Recommendations and Physical Activity Guidelines for the Under 5s in the United Kingdom, 2019
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This article summarizes the approach taken to develop UK Chief Medical Officers' physical activity guidelines for the Under 5s, 2019. METHODS: The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE)-Adaptation, Adoption, De Novo Development (ADOLOPMENT) approach was used, based on the guidelines from Canada and Australia, with evidence updated to February 2018. Recommendations were based on the associations between (1) time spent in sleep, sedentary time, physical activity, and 10 health outcomes and (2) time spent in physical activity and sedentary behavior on sleep outcomes (duration and latency). RESULTS: For many outcomes, more time spent in physical activity and sleep (up to a point) was beneficial, as was less time spent in sedentary behavior. The authors present, for the first time, evidence in GRADE format on behavior type-outcome associations for infants, toddlers, and preschoolers. Stakeholders supported all recommendations, but recommendations on sleep and screen time were not accepted by the Chief Medical Officers; UK guidelines will refer only to physical activity. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first European use of GRADE-ADOLOPMENT to develop physical activity guidelines. The process is robust, rapid, and inexpensive, but the UK experience illustrates a number of challenges that should help development of physical activity guidelines in future.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".