MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2961780322 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0218488

Extracurricular activity profiles and wellbeing in middle childhood: A population-level study

2019· article· en· W2961780322 on OpenAlexaffabout
Eva Oberle, Xuejun Ryan Ji, Carly Magee, Martin Guhn, Kimberly A. Schonert‐Reichl, Anne Gadermann

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicYouth Development and Social Support
Canadian institutionsLearning PartnershipUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPopulation based studyPopulationMedicineYoung adultDemographyGerontologyPsychologyEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examined profiles of participation in extracurricular activities (ECAs) in 4th grade children (N = 27,121; Mean age = 9.20 years; SD = .54; 51% male) in British Columbia, Canada. Latent class analyses were used to establish activity profiles and determine class membership; ANCOVA was used to investigate differences in mental wellbeing (optimism, life satisfaction, self-concept) and perceived overall health between groups. Data came from a cross-sectional, population-level child self-report survey (i.e., the Middle Years Development Instrument) implemented with 4th grade children in public schools. We found four distinct ECA profiles: participation in "All Activities", "No activities", "Sports" (i.e., individual and team sports), and "Individual activities" (i.e., educational programs, arts/music, individual sports). Wellbeing and health scores were highest for children in the "All Activities" and the "Sports" clusters, and lowest for those in "No Activities" and the cluster reflecting individual activities (i.e., "Individual activities"). Results are discussed in the context of previous research, and with respect to practical relevance.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.691
Threshold uncertainty score0.622

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations47
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicYouth Development and Social SupportFrench-language works237,207