Environmental and Motivational Determinants of Physical Activity among Canadian Inuit in the Arctic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Canadian Inuit have transited from a physically active hunter-gatherer subsistence lifestyle into sedentary ways of life. The purpose of the current study was to measure physical activity levels among Nunavut Inuit adults, and explore the socio-cognitive and environmental factors influencing the number of steps taken per day. METHOD: = 272) in Nunavut participated in a seven-day pedometer study during summer and winter seasons. Participants were asked to complete the Neighbourhood Environmental Walkability Scale (NEWS) and Behavioral Regulation in Exercise Questionnaire (BREQ-3). Data analyses included descriptive statistics, hierarchical linear regression, and tests of mediation effects. RESULTS: Participants had limited to low activity at a rate of 5027 ± 1799 and 4186 ± 1446 steps per day, during summer and winter, respectively. There were no seasonal and age effects on the number of steps. Gender effects and community differences were observed. Perceived infrastructure and safety as well as land use mix diversity were found to be positive environmental correlates of steps taken, which were partially mediated by identified motivational regulation. CONCLUSION: Physical activity levels among Nunavut adults are generally low, but can be promoted by improving the external physical environment and internal motivational regulation.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".