Exploring Parents’ Message Receipt and Message Enactment of the World’s First Integrated Movement Behaviour Guidelines for Children and Youth
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Canadian 24-Hour Movement Guidelines for Children and Youth are novel in how they integrate the guideline recommendations for the full continuum of movement behaviours, from sleep to vigorous physical activity. Research suggests that the integrated guidelines strategy is perceived favourably, and this study is the first to compare this strategy to traditional segregated guidelines on its effectiveness to disseminate health information. Specifically, this study explored (1) the influence of the integrated guidelines strategy on parents’ message receipt and message enactment to support their child meet the guidelines, and (2) the relationship between message receipt and message enactment in a youth movement behaviour context. In this prospective randomized experiment, parents (n= 162) were randomized to read integrated, segregated, or control guidelines and complete pre, post, and 2-week follow-up surveys. Repeated-measures ANOVAs revealed significantly higher message enactment outcomes among participants in the integrated guidelines group (p< .05). Message receipt and enactment outcomes were significantly correlated (r> .171, p< .05). These findings highlight that parents’ initial receipt of a message is important for subsequent behaviour change in a youth movement behaviour context. Furthermore, the integrated guidelines strategy may have an advantage in promoting guideline update and should continue to be explored.
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 | 0.010 | 0.047 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".