MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2980612812 · doi:10.12691/ajphr-7-5-3

Fostering a Culture of Lifestyle Physical Activity That Is Relatable for All Individuals and Communities to Embrace

2019· article· en· W2980612812 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
M. Felicia Cavallini, David J. Dyck

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican journal of public health research · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPhysical Activity and Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysical activityVariety (cybernetics)Intervention (counseling)PerceptionGerontologyPublic relationsPopulationPsychologyMedicinePolitical scienceNursingEnvironmental healthComputer sciencePhysical therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Most American and Canadian adults do not obtain the recommended PA guidelines of 150 minutes of moderate to vigorous physical activity (MVPA) and muscle-strengthening activity each week. Decades of attempting to increase PA within the adult population have clearly fallen short. What do we know about adult preferences, barriers and perceptions to PA and exercise that can influence the way we promote, connect and educate communities to move in a way that is more meaningful for them and likely to continue throughout adulthood and beyond? The purpose of this mini-review is to provide a rationale for the need to promote community lifestyle PA in a variety of ways based on research findings that can help educate, inspire and motivate all populations to become more engaged in PA. Customized, tailored, community PA visuals which are culturally and environmentally specific will be presented. Community graphics representing a small town (MyGaffney Activity), a mid-size town (MyGuelph Activity), a US state (MySouthCarolina Activity), and an airport (MyAirport Activity) will be introduced. The ultimate goal is to incorporate an effective PA intervention through a lifestyle PA paradigm addition, which will emulate a more realistic, doable, enjoyable, and natural form of PA in addition to the already established traditional exercise model for the benefit of the public to increase PA levels and improve health outcomes.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.099
Threshold uncertainty score0.197

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.441
GPT teacher head0.524
Teacher spread0.083 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations4
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican journal of public health researchSame topicPhysical Activity and HealthFrench-language works237,207