The pulse of recent research on school-based physical activity and wellness
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The pulse of recent research on school-based physical activity and wellness School is an ideal setting in which to reach and impact children and adolescents in order to improve their health and wellness.A large number of scholarly articles have been published on the subject of school-based physical activity (PA) and wellness promotion.However, given the diversity of schools worldwide, intervention programs, curricula, and strategies are not "one size fits all" and may not be universally applicable.The inconsistent application of theoretical frameworks and various measurement methods further muddles the evidence.One problem with many school-based PA and wellness interventions is their prospect for generalization and sustainability.In recent years, many researchers have turned attention to devising interventions, including school-based interventions targeting children and adolescents, to reduce health-compromising sedentary behavior, as well as to promote health-enhancing PA.Additional evidence-and stronger evidence than currently available-is needed to shed light on how these interventions can and should be scaled up, implemented, disseminated, and adopted more broadly in schools and populations.In this special topic of the Journal of Sport and Health Science (JSHS), we present 5 invited papers contributed by 4 world-renowned research groups to capture the pulse of the latest research on school-based PA and wellness.The 5 papers are all empirical studies, including 4 original first-hand studies and 1 systematic review with meta-analysis.The types of research conducted in these studies range from natural experiment and mixed-methods process evaluation to qualitative research, survey, and review.All 5 papers are based on recent competitively funded research projects carried out in schools.These research investigations were guided by implementation science and robust theoretical frameworks such as the socioecologic model and the theory of enhanced, extended, and expanded opportunity (TEO). 1 Last, these 5 studies represent mainly the Western perspective (i.e., USA, UK, and Norway) on school-based PA promotion and sedentary behavior mitigation, although Jones et al.'s systematic review and meta-analysis also summarizes findings from studies that took place in Canada; European Union countries; Hong Kong, China; Iceland; and Switzerland.Below, we present a synopsis of these 5 articles and encourage readers to refer to the full-text articles for more details.Jones and colleagues feature a multi-institutional collaboration for a systematic review with meta-analysis of school-based interventions to promote PA and/or reduce sedentary behavior in children aged 5À11 years of age.Guided by the TEO as the
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 | 0.028 | 0.096 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.012 | 0.016 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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".