MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2994304339 · doi:10.33233/rbfe.v7i3.3612

Identificação precoce de riscos em adolescentes sugere exclusão em programas de exercícios

2009· article· pt· W2994304339 on OpenAlexaffabout
Samuel Santos Valença

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista Brasileira de Fisiologia do Exercício · 2009
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPhysical Education and Gymnastics
Canadian institutionsCanadian Society for Exercise Physiology
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyMedicinePhysical exerciseGerontologyPhysical therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Atualmente, a premissa dos estudos preventivos tem se direcionado a um estilo de vida saudável, incluindo a participação precoce em programas de exercí­cios, sob uma orientação profissional. As triagens precoces de saúde permitem a elaboração de prescrições mais apropriada e efetiva destes programas. O presente estudo teve como objetivo investigar se adolescentes de duas instituições da rede particular de ensino da cidade de Vassouras (RJ) estavam aptos para a inclusão direta em um programa de exercí­cio, segundo as orientações do The American College of Sports Medicine. Para isto, foi utilizado um questionário baseado nos critérios da The Canadian Society of Exercise Physiology, o Physical Activity Readiness Questionnaire (PAR-Q). Os resultados revelaram: relatos de desconforto torácico durante a prática de exercí­cio fí­sico (15,9%), perda do equilí­brio em virtude de uma tonteira ou perda da consciência (28,7%) e problemas ósseos ou articulares (16,5%). A maior parte dos adolescentes (53%) apresentava indicação direta para uma orientação prévia antes da inclusão em um programa de exercí­cio fí­sico. Observou-se que, embora a prática de exercí­cio fí­sico seja freqüente, os resultados obtidos sugerem inaptidão dos adolescentes para inclusão direta, sem orientação profissional, em um programa de exercí­cio fí­sico.Palavras-chave: programa de exercí­cio, adolescentes, identificação de riscos.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.668
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.313 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevista Brasileira de Fisiologia do ExercícioSame topicPhysical Education and GymnasticsFrench-language works237,207