Meeting the <i>Canadian 24-Hour Movement Guidelines for Children and Youth</i>.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: , provide specific recommendations on the amount of time over a typical 24-hour day that children and youth aged 5 to 17 should spend in moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (at least 60 minutes), recreational screen time (no more than 2 hours), and sleep (9 to 11 hours for 5- to 13-year-olds; 8 to 10 hours for 14- to 17-year-olds). DATA AND METHODS: recommendations. Findings are presented overall and by age group and sex. Differences in average daily times between groups were tested for statistical significance, as weredifferences between groups in the percentages meeting each recommendation and combination of recommendations. RESULTS: specific time recommendations. Higher percentages of children than youth (29.6% versus 5.5%) and boys than girls (22.9% versus 11.8%) met the recommendations. About a third (36.3%) met two of the three recommendations. INTERPRETATION: Recommendations for moderate-to-vigorous physical activity, sedentary behaviour, and sleep have higher levels of adherence among children than youth.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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 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".