MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2982368704 · doi:10.5539/ies.v12n11p178

The Effects of Teacher Candidates’ Physical Activity Levels on Health-Related Quality of Life

2019· article· en· W2982368704 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Barış Gürol, Gülsün Güven, Dilek Yalız-Solmaz

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Education Studies · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPhysical Activity and Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVitalityPsychologyPhysical activityPhysical healthQuality of life (healthcare)Physical activity levelRegression analysisCorrelationSF-36Developmental psychologyClinical psychologyMental healthHealth related quality of lifePhysical therapyMEDLINEMedicineStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this research was to determine the effects of physical activity levels of teacher candidates on the sub-dimensions of health-related quality of life. In the research among the quantitative research methods, relational survey model was used. A total of 90 teacher candidates participated in this research. The International Physical Activity Questionnaire-Short Form (IPAQ-SF) and the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) were used in this study. In the data analysis, “percentage, frequencies, standard deviation, mean, Product-Moment Correlation coefficients and Multiple regression” were used. According to the results, role functioning/emotional, pain and general health sub-dimensions are important predictors on physical activity levels. However, physical functioning, emotional well-being, vitality, social functioning, role functioning/physical, sub-dimensions have not an important impact on physical activity levels statistically. As a conclusion, participation in physical activity can be said to have a negative effect on emotional problems and pain, and a positive effect on general health status.

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)0.004
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.113
GPT teacher head0.477
Teacher spread0.365 · 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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Education Studies→Same topicPhysical Activity and Health→French-language works237,207→